Russians will never go against Ukrainians since two most successful leaders of USSR who kept USSR together were Ukrainian origin

March 8th, 2014

Based on Wikipedia

Only few people knew that both  Nikita Sergeyevich  Khrushchev and Leonid Ilyich  Breshnev, the most successful leaders of USSR  who  kept USSR together were Ukrainian origin. They were ruling USSR from 1958 to 1964 and from 1964 to 1982  and were born in Ukraine or of Ukrainian origin. Brezhnev was born in Kamenskoe into a Russian worker’s family in ukraine. After graduating from the Dniprodzerzhynsk ( in Ukraine) Metallurgical Technicum, he became a metallurgical engineer in the iron and steel industry, in Ukraine. He joined Komsomol in 1923, and in 1929 became an active member of the Communist Party. He was drafted into immediate military service during World War II and left the army in 1946 with the rank of Major General. In 1952 Brezhnev became a member of the Central Committee, and in 1964, Brezhnev succeeded Nikita Khrushchev as First Secretary.

Khrushchev was born in the Russian village of Kalinovka in 1894, close to the present-day border between Russia and Ukraine into a Ukrainian family. He was employed as a metalworker in his youth, and during the Russian Civil War was a political commissar. With the help of Lazar Kaganovich, he worked his way up the Soviet hierarchy. He supported Joseph Stalin‘s purges, and approved thousands of arrests. In 1939, Stalin sent him to govern Ukraine, and he continued the purges there.

What Moscow regards as an illegal, neo-nazi infiltrated government in Kiev, led by Prime Minister Arseniy Yats” Yatsenyuk – an Ukrainian Jewish banker playing the role of Western puppet. it’s not only Moscow; half of Ukraine itself does not recognize the Yats gang as a legitimate government, now boasting a number of oligarchs imposed as provincial governors.

No UNHRC when Portuguese destroyed Buddhist Temples and erected Catholic Churches on top of destroyed Buddhist sites in Sri Lanka during the Portuguese era (1505 – 1658)

March 8th, 2014

by Sesha Samarajiwa Courtesy Asian Tribune

I am at the ancient Kelaniya Raja Maha Viharaya in Sri Lanka. I have come to this sacred Buddhist place seeking some sorely needed serenity. In a great hallway there, I see once again a painting – a panel of paintings – that tells a familiar story of brutal intolerance. It shows an army of Portuguese soldiers destroying this very temple. In fact, they did set fire to this sacred place and partially destroyed it. They also confiscated the temple, banning Buddhists from entering the precincts. Later, the Buddhists reclaimed and rebuilt the temple 200 years later under the auspices of King Kirti Sri Rajasinghe.

But the stark reminder of historic injustice and intolerance on the wall made my eyes mist over. And it kindled deep within me a spark of outrage, for it dawned on me, as clear as the blue sky outside, that nothing much had changed in our world; the same mindset that drove those long-dead Portuguese aggressors still fuels today’s oppressive trespassers.

So in a tea shop with a view of this achingly beautiful temple – a sacred temple my people had built over 2300 years ago years ago in honor of their Beloved Master, a temple which had withstood much tribulations – I began to sketch this essay.

Pests from the West

Evangelists belong to a long line of pests from the West who have come and keep coming like locusts to colonize our souls and cannibalize our cultures. I have in mind the whole bandwagon: Mormons who hunt in pairs, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Baptists, Anabaptists, Church of This and the Church of That, well-heeled evangelists of a mind-boggling array of corny creeds and cults, all of whom, in slick American style, are engaged in aggressive marketing and PR campaigns to boost their ranks and their coffers with suckers from the East. Of course, they command the money, the power and the technologies to back their campaigns, their fishing missions.

The main entranceway to the magnificent Kelaniya Raja Maha Viharaya. It's construction is credited to Prince Uttiya, brother of King Devanmpiyatissa.  Buddhism was introduced to Sri Lanka during this monarch's reign, in 306 BCE to be precise.

The main entranceway to the magnificent Kelaniya Raja Maha Viharaya. It’s construction is credited to Prince Uttiya, brother of King Devanmpiyatissa. Buddhism was introduced to Sri Lanka during this monarch’s reign, in 306 BCE to be precise.

The latest incursions are merely a continuation of the 500-year-old sorry saga of Asia, Africa and South America, which began with the arrival of the Portuguese and the Spaniards. Some have never recovered from the machinations of their priests and the savagery of their conquistadors. The baton of imperialism has passed from the Europeans to the Americans. That is not to say that the rest of the West has dropped out. They have not. They are very much in the game. It’s just that the Americans are in the lead, the new Romans on the rampage.

Carrots and sticks, time-tested tricks

The old tricks still work. Priests from the West come to the East. They tell the natives that good things will happen now and in the afterlife if only they accept their blond, blue-eyed god as their savior. Otherwise, the prospects would be dreadful.

Now, close your eyes, and let us pray,” says the priest. Let us pray that the god of your conquerors will save your miserable, heathen souls. Let him carry your burdens, give you comfort, so that when you die, you can enjoy eternity sitting on his lap. Every Sunday, let the blood of the lamb wash your sins away, so that you can live to sin another day. If you don’t, you’ll roast in hell forever. So, let us eat the flesh of our god and drink his blood to make sure that doesn’t happen!”
An image of Guatama Buddha.  Sri Lanka is the world's oldest, continuously Buddhist country.


An image of Gautama Buddha.

Sri Lanka is the world’s oldest, and continuous Buddhist country.

So we shut our eyes tight, clutch our bibles tighter and we pray. When we open our eyes, we have the bibles, while the canny comforters and their kind have our land, our blind allegiance and even our pennies, which can multiply into a tidy sum for the ‘spiritual’ cartel. Carrots and sticks. Time-tested tricks.

Cannibalizing Cultures

We know well how the Europeans won the West. They won it through mass genocide of the native populations in North and South America. In South America, hundreds and thousands of natives who resisted conversion were garroted. There is a poignant painting depicting such conversions. It shows armored Spanish soldiers garroting native priests, while a Spanish priest holds up a large cross. More terrified natives await their turn. On the side, another Spanish priest feeds stacks of ancient gold-leaf books of the Mayans into a fire. On the face of the Mayan priests, a look of utter sadness mixed with resignation.

In places like India and Sri Lanka, they were no better. They too faced abject horrors. In his book, Christianity’s scramble for India, Navaratna Rajaram says that the Christian Missionary is neither a Christian nor a missionary. In fact, he is a racist and a white supremacist in priestly guise.”

The cruelty of the Christians when converting the natives of places like Sri Lanka, India and the Philippines is well documented, but I can offer just a small sample here.

As Senaka Weeraratna asserts in this article, Repression of Buddhism in Sri Lanka by the Portuguese:

The Portuguese imperial agenda was to create discord in the country and then take maximum advantage of the situation for their benefit in terms of siphoning off wealth from Sri Lanka and converting Buddhists into Christianity, who then in their calculation would remain loyal to the Portuguese Crown rather than to the Sinhalese Kings of the land.”

Even if in less barbaric form, this was the agenda of the later colonial masters from Europe – the Dutch and the British.

The insidious destruction of culture

When people adopt an alien religion, it is not just a religion they adopt, but an alien way of life. Such people celebrate not so much local traditions, but the festivals and high points of Jews, Christians and Arabs and whichever colonial master they had.

One of the most beautiful Buddhist temples in the world, the Kelaniya Temple epitomizes refined Sinhala esthetics.  Buddhism fashioned the culture of the Sinhala. This Path -- from which the Sinhala have derived their spiritual sustenance -- is intrinsic to their heritage.

One of the most beautiful Buddhist temples in the world, the Kelaniya Temple epitomizes refined Sinhala esthetics. Buddhism fashioned the culture of the Sinhala. This Path — from which the Sinhala have derived their spiritual sustenance — is intrinsic to their heritage.

In his masterly travelogue, Among the Believers – An Islamic Journey, V S Naipaul shares his intimate insight into the ways an alien religion destroyed indigenous cultures. This is an extract from a speech he gave in 1990. Listen to Naipaul.

Because I was soon to discover that no colonization had been so thorough as the colonization that had come with the Arab faith. Colonized or defeated peoples can begin to distrust themselves. In the Muslim countries I am talking about, this distrust had all the force of religion. It was an article of the Arab faith that everything before the faith was wrong, misguided, heretical; there was no room in the heart or mind of these believers for their pre-Mohammedan past. So ideas of history here were quite different from ideas of history elsewhere; there was no wish here to go back as far as possible into the past and to learn as much as possible about the past.

Now, traveling among non-Arab Muslims, I found myself among a colonized people who had been stripped by their faith of all that expanding intellectual life, all the varied life of the mind and senses, the expanding cultural and historical knowledge of the world, that I had been growing into on the other side of the world. I was among people whose identity was more or less contained in the faith. I was among people who wished to be pure … No colonization could have been greater than this colonization by the faith.”

Naipaul describes the effects well. Christianity and Islam are just two sides of the same intolerant coin.

Cruel Custers and Cortezes

Their Buffalo Bills and their Wild Bills, their Custers and their Cortezes, and the long line of predators and priests made sure that the sorry remainder of once-proud nations would remain so, while they ruled the roost in lands drenched with native blood. Many weaker cultures succumbed to the relentless onslaught from the West. They either slaughtered those who resisted or they sowed the seeds of abjection and their eventual self-destruction.


Even today, we see the pathetic dregs of once-noble nations staggering around native reservations and barrios in North and South America, in Australia, in Canada, in New Zealand. They have lost their spirit. They have lost their will to live. They seem embarrassed to be alive. They are self-destructing. At best, they are performing monkeys titillating whites with a thirst for the exotic. These are abject peoples, vanishing tribes.

Now, not satisfied with ruling their large chunk of raided real estate, they are hell-bent on extending their hegemony over the whole world. Not even a little island nation in the Indian Ocean escapes their radar, a radar scanning new territories for economic, cultural and spiritual colonization.

They howl in protest when the natives resist. But it’s very easy to substantiate the nefarious activities of their ilk. Still, in the interests of space and time, I do not intend to cite the corpus of studies which prove beyond doubt the devastation that has been wreaked on various peoples and cultures by the religious agents of Western imperialism – an arrogant and ruthless enterprise fueled by religion, money and armed might, the unholy trinity of neo-imperialism.

Happy hunting grounds of human misery

Human misery is happy hunting grounds for the spiritual cartels. It has always been so. They strike when their targets are at their weakest or bomb them to submission to make sure they are at their weakest. Thus softened up, they are susceptible to inducements and brainwashing. In the 16th Century, the great temple was set ablaze by Portuguese soldados, partially destroying it.  Later, the Lankans repaired the damage.

In the 16th Century, the great Kelaniya temple was set ablaze by Portuguese soldados, partially destroying it. Later, the Lankans repaired the damage.

They have many tried and tested weapons in their arsenal. They are canny. To ‘convert’ people, you must first make them despise and reject what had sustained their people for millennia. So they vilify their faith or convince them it is a spent force or dark superstition. In so doing, they make us spit on our heritage.

Focus describes a grotesque brainwashing technique thus: “A Christian missionary (pastor) brings two boxes before little children. He says one belongs to Jesus and the other to Buddha. Children are asked to select any box of their choice. The Buddhist children select the box of Lord Buddha. They find the box empty. The pastor now says select the box of Jesus. It is filled with many nice things. Then the pastor says “see how Jesus loves you.”

You can read more about the Buddha Biscuit and religious conversion techniques in South Asia here.


Then as now, rare is the native who can resist such marvelous baubles. Make the bait juicy. Dazzle the natives with their power and glory. Pile on the questionable comforts of the religions they are peddling, and reel them in, easy as you please. Add another zombie to the roster. Check!


This is cruel. This is unacceptable. But protest and you are sure to invite a howl of counter protest accusing you of suppressing freedom – freedom to engage in their agenda.

Selling pie in the sky

Western religious intruders are, in every sense, Trojan horses, the Fifth Column, which the dictionary defines as A subversive group that supports the enemy and engages in espionage or sabotage; an enemy in your midst.” In the imperial enterprise, the priests always went in first, then followed the firepower. They may use foreign and local agents, but their controllers are megalomaniac Westerners, the powers behind most of the ‘churches’ selling pieces of blue sky to natives.

A mother and daughter pay their respects to the Great Teacher. Incredibly, despite tremendous predicaments spanning more than two millennia, the majority of the Sinhala people have managed to protect the Buddha Sasana and remain steadfast to their faith and way of life – a way of life worth preserving. ( Photos: Sesha Samarajiwa/ShootOut Photography)

A mother and daughter pay their respects to the Great Teacher. Incredibly, despite tremendous predicaments spanning more than two millennia, the majority of the Sinhala people have managed to protect the Buddha Sasana and remain steadfast to their faith and way of life – a way of life worth preserving. ( Photos: Sesha Samarajiwa/ShootOut Photography)

We welcome them to our lands and accept their gifts at grave risk. For once they are in, once they gain a foothold, they will demolish our unity and integrity, which is tantamount to annihilating our culture. Then we are one step closer to extinction.

The self-righteous mob on fishy fishing missions fishing in troubled waters should know that Asian civilizations were established on, and sustained by, the finest and wisest spiritual and moral foundations this planet has ever known. Although colonizers from the West have tried for five centuries to colonize our souls, make us ape them and adopt their delusions, many of us have resisted, while some of us, of course, succumbed to inducements and spiritual seduction. It’s too late to do anything about that now and I mean no offense to any Asian who worships the gods of the conquerors. I wish them well.

Fight cultural annihilation, resist converters

We believe it’s worth preserving the unique, beautiful and, yes, great civilizations that flourished in Asia. I don’t mean we should try to hang on to the past and reject modernity; that would be primitivism, guaranteed fossilization. That’s not what I’m promoting. Besides, that would be impossible, for cultures are not static; they are dynamic; they change; they adapt; they move on. I mean it’s worth preserving the quintessence of our cultures, for example, the way Thailand and Japan have done. They did that, to a large extent, by successfully repelling European priests – the Fifth Column I referred to earlier – from gaining a foothold in their homelands. Unfortunately, the rest of Asia was not so savvy. By the time they opened their eyes, the natives had the Bibles and the interlopers had their lands.


I believe we owe our future generations. It would be a pity if they can have a glimpse only in museums of the by then long dead cultures, the great cultures that had sustained their ancestors. I believe it is worth fighting for, as did our ancestors who fought against tremendous odds. (Admittedly, some of our ancestors sold out.) For that, we must be vigilant. For that, we must be courageous. For that, we should not allow alien cultures to colonize our souls. For that, we must resist bribes and brainwashing.

We know we are struggling against an enemy immensely more powerful than we are. But we must resist at all costs. In this do-or-die struggle to preserve our way of life and our spirit, we can take courage from the lessons of history. Where is the mighty Roman Empire whose dominion extended from remote Britain to the Middle East? Where is the British Empire where the sun once never set? Where today is the Soviet empire? Gone, vanished.

When the founding pillars of a people – religion, language and culture, all inextricably linked – are undermined, neither a nation nor a civilization can survive intact for long. Those who engage in such willful, relentless destabilization are engaged in emotional violence, psychological warfare. They traumatize and balkanize nations, set son against father, husband against wife, neighbor against neighbor, group against group, fermenting crisis and conflict, which will eventually lead to their destabilization and disintegration. Then they are soft targets for takeover.

For five centuries, their kind not only colonized our lands and bled us dry but, to add insult to injury, they also colonized some of our souls. Yet some of us, our heroes and our martyrs, resisted. So can we, if we have the guts to scream out loud: Be gone, ye wolves in sheep’s clothing!”


1. Navaratna Srinivasa Rasarum, Christianity’s scramble for India and the failure of the secularist’ elite, Hindu Writers Forum; (1999)

2. Sri Lanka: Conversions go south, Sunday Leader, June 5, 2005, reproduced in Buddhist Channel

3. Kamalika Piers, Christian conversion in Buddhist Sri Lanka
Island Newspaper, March 8, 2000. Reproduced in? Christian

4. Senaka Weeraratna, Repression of Buddhism in Sri Lanka by the Portuguese. (Abridged version).
The Buddhist Channel, June 28, 2005,1384,0,0,1,0#.UxpyAc7s4tU

5. V S Naipaul, Our Universal Civilization,City Journal, 1991.

Sesha Samarajiwa is interested examining foreign religious agents’ role as Fifth Columnists of neocolonialism/neoimperialism.

Is UNHRC Navi Pillay probe, a push to replace Sri Lanka with Diego Garcia?

March 7th, 2014

Shenali D Waduge

 There are many wanting to know why a country enjoying 4 years of post-terrorist peace with people and even former cadres getting on with their lives should be hounded by the likes of Navi Pillay, the US, UK and even India bringing Resolution after Resolution with non-associated additions with each new Resolution while no such Resolutions have come before the UNHRC for the Christian West’s successive imperial military interventions and regime change programs – the reasons are complicated just as they are unjust raising the need to always juxtapose demands made by US directly or through Navi Pillay or Ban Ki Moon against Sri Lanka with West’s desire to secure its geopolitical positioning in Asia when lease of its key base Diego Garcia is set to expire in 2016. When US is likely to be without a base sooner than later it needs to set the ground and it is doing a perfect covert operation just as it created a base by separating Kosovo and is now doing the same in Ukraine. The Government that boldly snubbed the Pillay report must now use the podium to place the issue of regime change as a topic that US/UK and West can be held accountable for.

Diego Garcia was given to the US on a 50 year lease after Britain unceremoniously chased out all the natives in what can be termed nothing other than forced expulsion or depopulation on request of US and pocketed USD14million from America. The British even exterminated all the pets and animals raised by the natives. It functions as an extraordinary rendition point. The British Government even lied to the British Parliament and the British citizens about the base and its use as a place where kidnapped people from overseas were flown in ‘ghost flights’ for inhuman and internationally banned interrogation methods. David Miliband was one of those liars. The British sham went on to hold an inquiry appointing Sir Peter Gibson who was the former head of UK intelligence leaving little to the imagination as to where the inquiry would lead to. If that was no considered a conflict of interest it is no surprise that Navi Pillay has deferred from recusing herself from Sri Lanka given that she is genetically, emotionally and ethnically a Tamil.

That US/UK were violating international laws never became a concern for Navi Pillay to issue statements against extraordinary renditions areas which she had direct mandate over. The European Parliament identified 1254 CIA flights through European airspace since September 2001.

  • 1984 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degradng Treatment or Punishment
  • 1966 International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights
  • 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its Protocol
  • 1949 Geneva Convention III related to Treatment of Prisoners of War

A semblance of justice and fair existing was seen when the British high court ruled that the eviction of the Chagosians was illegal and the British Government response was to overrule the order through a Royal Prerogative by Blair in 2004. UN, ICC, Navi Pillay were deaf and dumb to the human rights violations of these islanders.

The US has 1000 military bases (287 in Germany, 130 in Japan, 57 in Italy) in 130 countries and Diego Garcia is a strategic point to enable US to keep watch over Russia, China and India.

Sri Lanka is just 900 miles from Diego Garcia.

Navi Pillay so concerned as to know the numbers of dead, how they died and who killed them seems not in the least interested to know how many died in the US secret prisons/where their death certificates are, how they were buried or even if their families were ever notified. Navi Pillay has to date made absolutely no effort to even suggest a  MECHANISM to find out the violations at these extraordinary rendition points.

Having clearly established a very obvious double standard and biased attitude combined with action in the manner Navi Pillay has functioned towards the West and in viewing her efforts to ensure Libya’s intervention took place while she became the first UN official to call for the arrest of Syria’s President we are well aware of where her statements on Sri Lanka are leading.

If we place the Diego Garcia scenario in the context of pressure being exerted upon Sri Lanka we can only ask ourselves some questions

  • Why is Navi Pillay and US continuously insisting on removal of the Sri Lankan military from the North formulating their argument by bringing in examples of rape which the military has through evidence disproved. Is it because these parties have some deal with the Northern Provincial Council, its Chief Minister and the political party that claimed LTTE was the sole representative of the Tamils? Is this why these same players are calling for the implementation of the 13th amendment for that would easily pave the way for a separation of Sri Lanka? If this scenario stares Sri Lanka glaringly in the face we would like to know why the Government does not take efforts to repeal the 13th amendment and replace a district council system in lieu of the provincial council system?
  • Is the infiltration of Islamic fundamentalists sponsored through Saudi mosque funding a future scenario being laid out to use the 2004 Oluvil Declaration and kickstart the Eastern separation movement simultaneously so that the GOSL is placed in an uncomfortable situation having to deal with the ‘human rights’ issues that the West, Navi Pillay and the Western media will keep the Government and officials bogged down to answer?
  • If the Sri Lankan military were to be removed through pressure exerted using the terminology of ‘demilitarization’ is the next step to invite US presence as the ground work for these calls was placed way back in 2002 with the ceasefire agreement and later the agreements of the PTOMs and ISGA where direct ties and provision for direct aid was one of the clauses and all these agreements were pushed by Western governments obviously having their plans well placed. The same sets of local NGOs calling for ‘accountability’ today were the one’s who jumped with joy to say the ISGA/PTOMs was the best thing that could happen to Sri Lanka. The trail of the traitors is thus not very hard to distinguish.
  • With the Tamil Diaspora openly declaring their dissatisfaction with the draft 2014 Resolution, it depicted that the Resolutions had nothing whatsoever to do with crimes committed or not committed but everything to do with pushing foreign agendas and the role that was outsourced to them. Just as the current Uncle Toms in the form of Tutu’, Rajayppu Josephs and others are functioning – following the orders of their headquarters.
  • Into this equation the role of India is certainly confusing. Its leaders have not had the nationalistic leadership of the caliber of Subash Chandra Bose and have been ever ready to function as Brown Sahibs falling for the flattery of being referred to as the best friend of the West not realizing how Sri Lanka’s 13th amendment is likely to backfire on India where the Balkanization of India has been told enough times by respected academics like Rajiv Malhotra. Should it not be to India’s and Sri Lanka’s advantage that India cede its infatuation over 13th amendment for India should be not only securing India but ensuring Sri Lanka is not taken over by Western control. India may like to wonder who is India’s bigger enemy – US or China?
  • The dangers of a Western base which obviously is being pushed by Tamil lobbies in Sri Lanka, LTTE lobbies and Tamil Nadu leadership is not without some Western understanding and the context of this understanding can be none other than the agreement to function as US puppets.
  • Noteworthy too is the Mauritius scenario and Diego Garcia itself. While Mauritius has been the co-sponsor of the 2014 US Resolution, it is also making numerous gestures in the eventuality Britain does cede Diego Garcia which leaves Mauritius the plum opportunity of leasing out Diego Garcia. Obviously, US is looking at a larger presence than the 1500 personnel stationed in Diego Garcia and with Russia and China rising alongside the economies of other Asian nations, the US needs to strengthen its stakes.
  • Those that think serving under white rule again is honky dory may like to read up on the suffering of the natives in the nations that the US/UK and NATO promised to liberate. It would be good for Wigneswaran, Sambanthan and the rest of the coterie of others to see how wonderfully these natives now live including Egypt which is today in disarray. We cannot experiment with the imperialists for inviting trouble will leave us in eternal misery and nothing that we should sacrifice another 27,000 of our brave men simply because a handful of people for selfish reasons are ever ready to hand over the nation to foreigners.

As for the Government it behoves them to also realize the stakes involved and the need to come up with a plan that will not only save the Government but the entire nation that has kept its faith in them. These Resolutions need to be compared with the manner that the UN and its officials helped lay the foundations for the military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Somalia and now Syria… Diplomatic niceties need to be balanced against the realism of the dangers at stake for the entire 20million people and it is in such instances that just as much the rest of the population need to take stock of the ground realties the politicians need to remove themselves from their selfish politically motivated games and remove themselves from the ugly habit of trying to always strike deals for these will work to the country’s disadvantage.

In the backdrop of the current Resolution and the manner in which Navi Pillay is showing extraordinary interest in ONLY Sri Lanka while paying scant attention to the West whose crimes cannot be ignored goes to show that there is nothing called justice, fair play in existence. World justice has been crafted to absolve the West of crimes which its officials ignore while they have explicit approval to go after Third World nations.

 If the Third World nations meekly accept this injustice when numerically they are in a position to unite and demand that the West and the UN discontinue the injustice, we are likely to see more regime change and total annihilation of populations similar to how the Chaggosians were treated by US and UK. Ordinary Tamils may like to wonder exactly where their leaders are planning to take them and Sri Lanka by their foolhardy antics and the same goes for the Colombians praying to become servants of the West.

Sri Lanka’s patriotic forces and the nation-loving public are not prepared to watch a further 27000 of our armed forces personnel be subject to sacrifice for the reality of 30 years of past politics have shown that idling with the issue for political reasons ended up only in death and destruction. Politicians and public officials are to be reminded that it is not their private property that they are making deals with and as recipients of remunerations by the toil of the public the onus is on them to secure the nation and not dole it out simply to score points against others. This statement is relevant for all those holding portfolios who have no vote base and are holding ministries on the kindness of the leader and they have no right to implement their ideologies.

We expect our leaders to protect the nation once and for all.



Latest On Ukraine -Kissinger: Demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.

March 7th, 2014

Kissinger: Leave Ukraine to Ukrainians

John Glaser,

Ukraine crisis is merely an illustration of how degenerate and juvenile our politics has become in the generation that has followed his.

Henry Kissinger, architect of the destruction of Indochina and secretary of state to one of America’s most corrupt leaders, wrote an Op-Ed in the Washington Post yesterday making arguments that, if uttered on any of the cable news shows, would be condemned as anti-American.

Kissinger’s analysis is a balanced one, in contrast to much of what we’ve seen. Public discussion on Ukraine is all about confrontation,” he laments. Far too often the Ukrainian issue is posed as a showdown: whether Ukraine joins the East or the West. But if Ukraine is to survive and thrive, it must not be either side’s outpost against the other — it should function as a bridge between them.”

The West’s approach to Ukraine has been characterized much like the Russian approach: zero-sum. But, Kissinger advises, We should seek reconciliation, not the domination of a faction” inside Ukraine.

Kissinger also seems to criticize the superficial and trivial nature of the commentary from pundits and politicians. He says the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for the absence of one.” Furthermore, the United States needs to avoid treating Russia as an aberrant to be patiently taught rules of conduct established by Washington.”

Kissinger then proposes four suggestions for how to settle the issue in a responsible (not belligerent) manner that prioritizes how it ends, not how it begins.”

1. Ukraine should have the right to choose freely its economic and political associations, including with Europe.

2. Ukraine should not join NATO, a position I took seven years ago, when it last came up.

3. Ukraine should be free to create any government compatible with the expressed will of its people. Wise Ukrainian leaders would then opt for a policy of reconciliation between the various parts of their country. Internationally, they should pursue a posture comparable to that of Finland. That nation leaves no doubt about its fierce independence and cooperates with the West in most fields but carefully avoids institutional hostility toward Russia.

4. It is incompatible with the rules of the existing world order for Russia to annex Crimea. But it should be possible to put Crimea’s relationship to Ukraine on a less fraught basis. To that end, Russia would recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea. Ukraine should reinforce Crimea’s autonomy in elections held in the presence of international observers. The process would include removing any ambiguities about the status of the Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol.

It’s hard to know if Kissinger has become more reasonable in his old age, or if his tempered approach to the Ukraine crisis is merely an illustration of how degenerate and juvenile our politics has become in the generation that has followed his. For a man that has committed and been complicit in war crimes, it’s troubling that this is the voice of moderation. Either way, his suggestions are the most reasonable yet articulated in the mainstream: leave Ukraine’s future up to Ukrainians, don’t make it a choke point for feckless geo-political competition between the U.S. and Russia.

Full Story

How the Ukraine crisis ends

By Henry A. Kissinger, Published: March 5
Henry A. Kissinger was secretary of state from 1973 to 1977.

The West must understand that, to Russia, Ukraine can never be just a foreign country. Russian history began in what was called Kievan-Rus. The Russian religion spread from there. Ukraine has been part of Russia for centuries, and their histories were intertwined before then. Some of the most important battles for Russian freedom, starting with the Battle of Poltava in 1709 , were fought on Ukrainian soil. The Black Sea Fleet — Russia’s means of projecting power in the Mediterranean — is based by long-term lease in Sevastopol, in Crimea. Even such famed dissidents as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Joseph Brodsky insisted that Ukraine was an integral part of Russian history and, indeed, of Russia.Putin should come to realize that, whatever his grievances, a policy of military impositions would produce another Cold War. For its part, the United States needs to avoid treating Russia as an aberrant to be patiently taught rules of conduct established by Washington. Putin is a serious strategist — on the premises of Russian history. Understanding U.S. values and psychology are not his strong suits. Nor has understanding Russian history and psychology been a strong point of U.S. policymakers.

Leaders of all sides should return to examining outcomes, not compete in posturing. Here is my notion of an outcome compatible with the values and security interests of all sides:

1. Ukraine should have the right to choose freely its economic and political associations, including with Europe.

2. Ukraine should not join NATO, a position I took seven years ago, when it last came up.

3. Ukraine should be free to create any government compatible with the expressed will of its people. Wise Ukrainian leaders would then opt for a policy of reconciliation between the various parts of their country. Internationally, they should pursue a posture comparable to that of Finland. That nation leaves no doubt about its fierce independence and cooperates with the West in most fields but carefully avoids institutional hostility toward Russia.

4. It is incompatible with the rules of the existing world order for Russia to annex Crimea. But it should be possible to put Crimea’s relationship to Ukraine on a less fraught basis. To that end, Russia would recognize Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea. Ukraine should reinforce Crimea’s autonomy in elections held in the presence of international observers. The process would include removing any ambiguities about the status of the Black Sea Fleet at Sevastopol.

These are principles, not prescriptions. People familiar with the region will know that not all of them will be palatable to all parties. The test is not absolute satisfaction but balanced dissatisfaction. If some solution based on these or comparable elements is not achieved, the drift toward confrontation will accelerate. The time for that will come soon enough.

Full Story

C’mon baby, light my (Crimean) fire
By Pepe Escobar

March 16 is C Day. The Crimean parliament – by 78 votes with 8 abstentions – decided this is the day when Crimean voters will choose between joining the Russian Federation or to remain part of Ukraine as an autonomous region with very strong powers, according to the 1992 constitution.
Whatever “diplomatic” tantrums Washington and Brussels will keep pulling, and they will be incandescent, facts on the ground speak for themselves. The city council of Sevastopol – the headquarters of Russia’s Black Sea fleet – has already voted to join Russia. And next week the Duma in Moscow will study a bill to simplify the mechanism of adhesion. Quick recap: this is a direct result of Washington spending US$5 billion – a Victoria “F**k the EU” Nuland official figure – to promot regime change in Ukraine. On the horizon, Crimea may be incorporated into Russia for free, while the “West” absorbs that bankrupt back-of-beyond (Western Ukraine) that an Asia Times Online reader indelibly described as the “Khaganate of Nulands” (an amalgam of khanate, Victoria’s notorious neo-con husband Robert Kagan, and no man’s land).
What Moscow regards as an illegal, neo-nazi infiltrated government in Kiev, led by Prime Minister Arseniy “Yats” Yatsenyuk – an Ukrainian Jewish banker playing the role of Western puppet – insists Crimea must remain part of Ukraine. And it’s not only Moscow; half of Ukraine itself does not recognize the Yats gang as a legitimate government, now boasting a number of oligarchs imposed as provincial governors.
Yet this “government” – supported by the US and the European Union – has already declared the referendum illegal. Proving its impeccable “democratic” credentials, it has already moved to ban the official use of the Russian language in Ukraine; get rid of the communist party, which amassed 13% of the votes in the last election, more, incidentally, than the neo-nazi-infested Svoboda (“Freedom”) party, now ensconced in key government security posts; and ban a Russian TV station, which happens to be the most popular on Ukrainian cable.Amid all the hysteria from Washington and certain European capitals, what’s not explained to puzzled public opinion is that these fascists/neo-nazis who got to power through a coup will never allow real elections to take place in Ukraine; after all they would most certainly be sent packing.
This implies that “Yats” and his gang – on top of it reveling at their red carpet welcome at a pompous yet innocuous EU summit in Brussels – won’t budge. For instance, they used heavy muscle to send pro-Russian protesters in front of the Donetsk government building running. Heavily industrialized Donetsk is very much linked commercially to Russia.
Then there’s an even more sinister possible scenario looming in the horizon; an instrumentalization of the lunatic jihadi fringe of the 10% of Tatars in Crimea, from false flags to suicide bombings. The House of Saud, according to a solid Saudi source, is immensely interested in Ukraine, and may be tempted to do a few favors for Western intelligence.
Will our love become a funeral pyre?
Arguably, for Moscow, keeping Crimea inside the Ukraine, with large autonomous powers plus the current signed agreement to keep the base in Sevastopol, is a much better deal than annexing it. It’s as if Russia was annexing what for all practical purposes was already a Russian province

Full Report

Russia demands independent probe into events in Kiev’s Maidan
Mar 07,2014 MOSCOW, March 7 (Xinhua) — Moscow demands an independent investigation into the events in Kiev, where some 100 people died last month, a top Russian legislator said Friday. 

Follow the Link for Old Stories

Russia Starts Massive Air Defense Drills Amid Crimea Standoff


Delegates at the UNHR Council should reject the report presented by Navi Pillai as her impartiality is in question.

March 6th, 2014

By Charles.S.Perera

The UNO according to its Charter is to develop good relations with its member states, to develop, peace and security. UNO is to harmonize the actions of its member states to solve their common economic, cultural or humanitarian problems.  It accepts the equality of all states without consideration of their  economic or political status.  Every one working in the UN System from the Director General to the junior most staff member should be an embodiments of the noble principles laid down in the UN Charter.

All members of the UN System should perform the duties allocated to them without bias, or prejudice  towards any Member State, and with absolute impartiality.  They should extend that impartiality not only to the Member States, but also towards Communities  within Member states without being favourable to one, and biased against another.

These are the noble principles of the UN Charter that should be emulated by  every  member of the UNSystem.   Therefore in Selecting a Professional Staff Member  as a Head of a UN Commission, those who are responsible for such appointments should be careful to select a person  who could stand upto  those noble principles of the UNCharter,  against whom no finger  could be raised for partiality, bias, or prejudice.

Has the UNO selection board In the appointment of Ms. Navi Pillai as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights investigated  her suitability  in terms of the Noble Principles of the UN System laid down by the founding fathers of UNO ?

Even though the predecessor of the Present UN Commissioner for Human Rights , the Canadian Ms. Louise Arbour, lacked impartiality due to her being influenced by the Tamil Community in Canada, Navi Pillai the Present UN Commissioner for Human Rights is on the other hand  pro-Sri Lanka Tamils by being herself a Tamil, and suffered for being a Tamil. Therefore she is biased against the Government of Sri Lanka on the question of Sri Lanka Tamils.

 Hence her suitability to present a report on how Sri Lanka eliminated Tamil terrorists, and how it affected the Tamil people  in Sri Lanka is not acceptable. The Secretary General of UNO should not have allowed her to investigate and present a report on Sri Lanka as there is an evident  conflict of interest.

The Board of Selection of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, should not have gone by her qualifications alone, but should have examined her background and her  psychological suitability to hold this very high post in the UN System, as she has to work with countries having  Tamil Communities, to which she herself belongs.

She belonged to the South African Tamil Community.  She was born  and brought up in a  poor ghetto of the South African Tamils in Durban.  She suffered under South African apartheid  system   from her birth, and  throughout  her growing years.  She suffered because she was a Tamil.

She recounts her child hood in her own words, We lived in Clairwood… a victim of race riots in 1949 and that’s what  caused the fear  on part of the residents of Clairwood, including my parents.  With me firstly, when I was six years old  I was the victim of robbery. My mother had given me my father’s entire monthly wages, which was Rs.5 to take to him.  He was a bus driver I was supposed to meet him at the corner and hand his money to him.  Meanwhile he had not asked for the money it was his conductor who had planned that ruse and he grabbed the money from my hand off he went.

My mother beat me up for that. I don’t know why the victim get beaten.  Anyway,and I ended up giving evidence in court at the age of seven in the same Durban High Court where I many years later sat as a judge….. but really what bugged me is that we didn’t get the Rs.5 back and I felt so guilty as a child that I had caused the lost to my parents.”

The seeds  of racial hatred  was thus born in her from her very tender age of  six years.  The Registrar of the Natal University had advised her against studying law as it was not imaginable that a non-white lawyer gives instructions to white secretaries.  However she overcame difficulties opening her own law practice, as nobody would employ her, and becoming in 1995 to be the first coloured lawyer to appear in the South African Supreme Court.

It had been a continuous struggle against discrimination by the White apartheid South African Government because of her being a Tamil.  Thus she went on to become an anti apartheid activist.  These are remarkable achievements, but they also resulted in her becoming a staunch defender of those who are  discriminated against for being Tamils.  In the mean time LTTE had infiltrated into the South African Tamil Community in Durban and organised a series of LTTE Front Organisations.  They come in contact with the ANC Leaders and organised training Camps.

The LTTE carried out propaganda in South Africa for the Tamils in Sri Lanka.  They began drawing parallels with Sri Lanka and South Africa, equalling the treatment of Tamils in Sri Lanka to  that of the blacks in South Africa.  They drew parallels between British handing of South Africa to Boers with Sri Lanka to the Sinhalese.

They claimed that in Sri Lanka the Sinhalese have occupied the lands of the Tamils, and made Tamils foreigners in their own homelands.  They did not hesitate to compare Mandela to Prbhakaran.  The LTTE front organisations started working with the South African Parliamentarians, and began collecting funds for the LTTE to campaign against the Government of Sri Lanka.

The anti-apartheid  activist that was  Navineethan  Pillai was certainly in contact with some of these LTTE Front Organisers as she was sympathetic to the cause of the Tamils. Having met these  sympathetic LTTE agents in South Africa Navi Pillai had no reason to believe that the Tamil were terrorists.  They were  only fighting to free themselves from the anti Tamil  Sinhala government.  This must have been driven deep into her mind having herself suffered from apartheid because she was a Tamil.

Her appointment as the UN  Commisioner for Human Rights, was for her an occasion to defend also the rights of the Tamils discriminated against by any government in the world.  But that regrettable psychological bias against any government  which is claimed to have discriminated against Tamils would  not allow Navi Pillai to investigate such a  problem impartially and objectively.  This is what has happened to Navi Pillai in investigating the problem of Tamils with the Government of Sri Lanka.

The problems of the Tamils in Sri Lanka have become her problem, and therefore she is out to take revenge from Sri Lanka Sinhala Government, as she was taking revenge from the apartheid Government of South Africa that discriminated against her for being a Tamil.

 Navineetham Pillai is therefore  not suitable to have been appointed as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.  Her background had not been sufficiently investigated and her  psychological make up  after having been born and  brought up in a brutal apartheid surrounding ,  and suffered  for her accident of birth as a Tamil which would remain a prejudice which will blind her to objective evaluation of political issues involving Tamil people,  had not been taken into consideration in selecting her to  such a high post in the UN System.

Jiddu Krishnamurthy, the well known mystic philosopher had said that each one of us  is a fractioned being.  An individual is therefore fractioned. One fraction is  of the  nationality, one of the religion, another of the social status, another of the profession, and so on.  Hence when one looks at a problem it will be with the fraction that is concerned most with the problem.  That does not allow one to see the whole of the problem.  Only way to be impartial and objective in looking at a problem is therefore to look at the it  as an un-fractioned whole.

Navi Pillai is therefore looking at the Tamil problem in Sri Lanka from the fraction of her Tamilness because of which she herself suffered.  In such a situation Navi Pillai

will never see the reality, and understand  the truth of terrorism in Sri Lanka.

She will not see that  Sri Lanka government and its Armed Forces after elimination of terrorism is not discriminating against the Tamil Community,  but treating  the people of all Communities  as citizens of one Sri Lanka, without differentiating the people as belonging to a minority Community  or a majority Community.

In what ever way it is explained, for Navi Pillai the problem is how she sees it.

In that situation the honourable Delegates at the present session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva should reject  the report present by the UN High Commissioner Navi Pillai, and consider her unsuitability to  hold the post of  the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights  and investigate into the problem of Sri Lanka as there is an evident conflict of interest.

Will Sri Lanka end up in a Sierra Leone type Situation? Darussaman Panelists Feed the Conspiracy Theory

March 6th, 2014

By Bandu de Silva

 Whether Sri Lanka will have to finally face a Sierra Leone like situation depends on what the UNHRC decides on the draft Resolution which was finally submitted to the Council yesterday (March 7th ) in the original form with no major  modification of its Clause Three. The original Clause 3 led India to express some reservations on it and seek a modification. The only modification is the words relevant mandated agencies” being replaced by Relevant special procedures.” The modified form makes the position even more complicated. What are the special procedures anyway?   That the Draft Resolution surfaced now in even a worse form points to some confidence on the part of its movers that it could have a chance of going through the Council this time. The prospects should not be discounted, particularly if India would not throw her weight behind Sri Lanka but submit to both US and Tamil Nadu pressure.

In my assessment, the success of the Draft Resolution could result in a Sierra Leone type of situation for Sri Lanka with its implications for other countries in the future of being cited as a precedence.

In the case of Sierra Leone, it was the Security Council which authorized the UNSG to prepare the blueprint for action which was to prepare for the Special Court. Now in the case of Sri Lanka, the attempt is for the UNHRC to take over the Security Council’s burden and transfer the responsibility of drawing up the blueprint to the HR High Commissioner and through her to involve other ‘relevant special procedures.’

It is only now that St Lanka has realized this and her Permanent Representative in Geneva has pointed out that UNHRC is trying to assume the role of a Court. No. It is not the elected body which is trying to assume that role but the office of High Commissioner. Earlier, the Sri Lanka delegation lost perspective and made the mistake of concentrating on defending the LLRC recommendations as Minister Samarasinghe’s statement demonstrated, on which there was little debate as far as the member countries were concerned. Even the US accepted the usefulness of the LLRC’s recommendations until later when John Mariz claimed that the recommendations had no time frame for implementation and did not adequately address issues of accountability. Otherwise, only the Panelists and the High Commissioner found fault with them.

The issue to be tackled went beyond the confines of the Sri Lankan case. It was an issue which would not be confined to Sri Lanka alone but would apply to all member countries in future, namely, that of empowering the office of the UNHRC [and other ‘relevant special procedures’] with powers which only the Security Council was vested with so far.

 Sierra Leone Situation

What is the Sierra Leone like situation?  [That will be discussed in detail later.] To mention briefly, UN and Sierra Leone signed an agreement to appoint an independent court following a request to UN to help end the long civil war conflict in the country …. as a strategy for reconciliation. Sierra Leone government’s appeal to UN was like Sri Lanka requesting the Norwegians to facilitate/mediate in a settlement of the conflict with the LTTE. The difference in the two situations was that the government of Sierra Leone straight away requested the United Nations whose response came in the form of establishing an international court to prosecute those responsible for atrocities during the civil war”. That is how things turned out whether the West African country liked it or not. Sri Lanka avoided such a situation of UN action by opting for Norwegian facilitation which turned out to be mediation.

On August 14, 2000, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1315, which requested “the Secretary-General to negotiate an agreement with the Government of Sierra Leone to create an independent special court. Its jurisdiction was to include “……. notably crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law,” and whose personal jurisdiction would be “over persons who bear the greatest responsibility” for these crimes “including those leaders who, in committing such crimes, have threatened the establishment of and implementation of the peace process in Sierra Leone.” The Security Council asked the Secretary-General to produce a detailed blueprint for the special court. The blue print subjected to the Special Court, the primacy over domestic prosecutions in Sierra Leone and to issue binding orders to the government of Sierra Leone, though unlike the International Court on Yugoslavia (ICTY) and International Court on Rwanda (ICTR) it had no primacy over national courts of third States or to order the surrender of an accused located in any third State. It did not hinder the Court’s operation since most of the suspected perpetrators were in custody in Sierra Leone.   

 Darussman Panel

 Now in the case of Sri Lanka, the Darussman Panel appointed by UN Secretary General, Ban-ki- Moon with the ostensible purpose of advising him personally on accountability in Sri

Lanka, recommended to him the establishment of an independent authority (nature not specified) to go into the account of accountability. Despite the Panel report being considered a document containing personal advice to the SG – and not a public document of the UN which claims were at times very confusing – the report was surreptitiously placed before the UNHRC session in Geneva by the HR High Commissioner Navi Pillay. Mr.Moon only claimed his ignorance of what happened in the inimitable style of a Chinese porker player!

 Gains in status

 The Panel Report has since gained status advancing from an ‘unofficial document’ at the UN in New York to an ‘official’ document at the UNHRC sessions in Geneva. As the High Commissioner Navi Pillay told the current session, the UNHRC has two documents now before it, one the Panel report and the other, Sri Lanka’s LLRC [Report] recommendations. However, in her statements she has given precedence to the Panel Report as a ‘standard setting’ document. The Sri Lankan Report falls short of that criteria according to both the Panelists and the High Commissioner, the shortcomings in it being the absence of a time –frame for implementation of its recommendations and lack of accountability.

 The Panelists enter the UNHRC debate

 The article published in the New York Times (NYT)  on 2nd March 2012 under the name of the three Darussmn Panelists establishes beyond any doubt, not only the prejudiced nature of the Panel’s findings but the personal agenda these the panelists had harboured when they wrote their report. The present manifestation by them in their letter to NYT first calling for support for the US sponsored resolution and at the same time calling for the UNHRC to create an independent investigative body to determine the facts and identify those responsible, as ….recommended in … the [panel] report”, demonstrates that their objective had not been to report to the Secretary General  as an independent un-involved party but as a committed party with partisan interest.

There is no reason otherwise, for the Trio to write to the New York newspaper at this stage. The article alleges President Rajapaksa promising Secretary General Moon that he would address the question of accountability for violations against civilians” [but]…….[w]hen, a year later, the govt. had done nothing to carry out Rajapaksa’s commitment, it says the Secretary – General asked the three of us” to study the allegations of atrocities during the last stages of the war and Sri Lanka’s response.”

Moon’s credibility in question

This public statement by the Panelists now brings Secretary General Moon’s credibility into question. The three Panelists seem to have taken over Moon’s burden to explain what motivated him to appoint without the approval of the UN, a Panel to offer him personal advise  when there was a competent highly paid Secretariat consisting of an international civil service. Mr. Moon never went on record claiming publicly any prevarication on the part of the Sri Lankan President. He repeatedly claimed that he was appointing the Panel to advice himself in his personal capacity and nothing more. He did not even say that the Report would be placed in the public domain; or he would be submitting it to the UNHRC in Geneva but the Report was surreptitiously placed there by Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay.

Even if Mr.Moon tried to make a pretense that he did not know about its appearance in Geneva, it could not have happened without his personal knowledge. He was obviously playing, as I said earlier, a bit of Chinese Poker there. Human Rights High Commissioner, Navi Pillay made full use of the Report at UNHRC session at which it was placed and even at the current session she is drawing attention to it and even contrasting the LLRC recommendations have not come up to the standards mentioned in the Panel’s report.

 All this sounds curious now. Don’t these strange developments give credence to the conspiracy theory in which the Secretary General himself cannot absolve himself of being an accomplice?

  Panelists’ continued opposition to LLRC      

What makes the so called independent Panelists to take this unusual step of posting a public article in NYT at this stage? The acceptance of the LLRC recommendations as a positive contribution all round by member countries including the US, until the US Delegate John C Mariz speaking later stated in his address that the LLRC report did not include any plan to implement its recommendations, nor did  it adequately address the crucial issue of accountability”. Despite this fine tuning of the US’s position, – it seems to come in doses, not at once – the general opinion expressed by the Panelists about the LLRC is a serious affront to them. They accused the Sri Lankan Government earlier that  …[r]ather than tackling these allegations head-on through a truth commission or criminal investigations , Sri Lanka created a Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission” whose mandate , composition and methods all cast serious doubts on its willingness to uncover what really happened in those fateful months.”  (Now repeated in NYT article).

Furthermore, they are disturbed that the LLRC, as they say, ignored or played down our report’s conclusion and characterized civilian deaths as stemming from the army’s responses to Tamil Tiger shelling or cross-fire – as sporadic, exceptional and mostly inevitable in the heat of battle.”

That should surely be disturbing to the Panelists because their lack of objectivity in deciding the cause of the civilian deaths has been exposed. The Panelists have now shed all pretentions and brazenly claim that the bulk of that total [deaths] was attributable to deliberate, indiscriminate, or disproportionate governmental attacks on civilians, through massive shellings and aerial bombardment, including on clearly marked hospitals.”

Now the Trio tries create further sensation by claiming they found credible evidence that both sides had symmetrically flouted the laws of war, leading to as many as 40,000 deaths, – many multiples more than caused by the strife in Libya and Syria. Besides the serious doubt about the basis on which these figures were arrived at, the Panelists are guilty of presenting an unverifiable state of affairs.

This comparison is completely uncalled for considering that the situations were totally different. In Sri Lanka, the government forces were meeting a ruthless terrorist force which was highly trained in both conventional and guerilla warfare fighting to destabilize a democratically elected government and holding civilians as a protective shield.

If the Panelists wanted a statistical comparison to enhance the dimensions of the Sri Lankan situation, in fairness, the comparison could have been made with the numbers killed in North Vietnam of US bombing sprees Rolling Thunder” which has been put at 182,000, not counting others burned and maimed including the destruction of vegetation as a result of the use of Napalam bombs, and the several millions of women and children who died in Iraq through starvation and malnutrition alone during the two wars there (I watched it from neighbourhood), the second war looking for non-existing WMDs. This is not to plead that civilian deaths in Sri Lanka should be ignored because worst crimes were committed by the US and her allies elsewhere but there has to be a justification for the numbers quoted and in the comparisons made.

In a critique of the internal mechanism process that the government has set up, the Panelists say When it came to proposing next steps for the government, it called for investigations by the same entities – the army and the attorney general – who have a track record of ignoring government abuses for decades.

 Good word marginal

The only good thing the Panelists now say about the LLRC is really marginal, i.e. that the report had some welcome elements, too… [in that]….it recognized some of the root causes of the war, as well as the responsibility of both the government and Tigers for civilian casualties…… And it endorsed  our view that Sri Lanka had to provide truth, justice and reparations to victims; release detainees, and protect the state’s besieged journalists.”

The reference to the government’s record of numerous recommendations of prior commissions of inquiry ….not [having] been implemented by the government” has no relevance. That is not a remark for even  a so called independent group to recommend to the UNSG. It only further strengthens the view that the Panelists were biased from the start.

 Correcting the defeat of 2009

The Panelists are harping back to the Resolution of 2009 and calling for correcting that embarrassing defeat”. They are not satisfied with that alone. They see Sri Lanka’s unwillingness” to take concrete steps, and argue that the best way to get to the truth is for the Council to create an independent investigative body to determine the facts and identify those responsible, as we recommended in our report.” This is the crux of the matter. This long term plan of the Panelists to rope in Sri Lanka as a country which committed serious war crimes and place her in the same category as other countries like former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Sierra Leone commenced even before the end of the war.

It is now clear that Mr.Moon selected the members of the Panel not for their record of integrity and independence but because he was advised that with their committed bias towards the LTTE or against Sri Lankan government’s institutions as Darusman displayed, it would be the best team to make a report emphasizing Sri Lankan government’ accountability for civilian deaths and suffering and alleged infringement of human rights and International humanitarian laws. What Secretary General Moon was looking for was a document which would highlight the Sri Lankan Government’s responsibility while making a pretention of the crimes and atrocities committed by the opposing party, which would help him find an alternative way to pressurize Sri Lanka over accountability.

 Unhappy over 2009 Resolution

The Panelists are unhappy that the UNHRC adopted the Resolution in 2009 which was advantageous to Sri Lanka. They want to see it undone. So they are now supporting the US and others to pass a new Resolution tying down Sri Lanka to a definitive time frame to implement the LLRC recommendations which the Panelists once declared, could not be expected from the

LLRC but which calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the constructive recommendations in the LLRC report and additionally to take immediate steps to fulfill its relevant legal obligations and stated commitment to address serious allegations of violations of international law by initiating credible and independent investigations and prosecutions of those responsible for such violations, as well as seeks to strengthen the hand of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and relevant special mandate holders to provide, and the Government of Sri Lanka to accept, advice and technical assistance on implementing those steps.

 Vague terminology

The statements by the Panelists contain rather vague terminology such as the institution of credible and independent investigations and prosecution of those responsible for such violations” . It is not clear whether the investigations are to be carried out by Sri Lankan authorities or not. The three Panelists complain that when it came to proposing next steps for the government, it [LLRC] called for investigations by the same entities – the army and the attorney general – who have a track record of ignoring government abuses for decades.”

That shows a point of view submitted to UNSG and now repeated publicly by the Panelists that the investigations by the Sri Lankan Armed Services (Court Martial proceedings) and by the Attorney General through the Law Courts are not acceptable to the Panelists. The High Commissioner’s statements show agreement with that position though not so explicitly. For all intents and purposes, the Panelists are demanding an investigative process by an independent authority outside these, i.e., an external mechanism.

They are asking the international community must now assume its duty to ensure that Sri Lanka fulfills its responsibilities to all its people and to the rest of the world. What this responsibility is clearly not stated. Ostensibly, it stands for a request to support the US Draft Resolution. That is as a first step. But they go beyond that in requesting an independent mechanism of investigation.

 Multi-Steps Strategy of the US Draft Resolution

The idea behind the Draft Resolution may outwardly be seen as an attempt to pressurize Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of the LLRC but it is not intended as ordinary pressure. It contains several steps . The first is to commit Sri Lanka to a time-frame for implementation. The next and more significant and insidious step is to empower the office of the High Commissioner (Navi Pillay) and relevant special mandate holders to provide advice and technical assistance on implementing those steps and the GOSL to, and the Government of Sri Lanka to accept.

 Removing the Initiative from Sri Lankan Government

Tying down Sri Lanka to a time frame will not leave her with time and space to examine the involvements in a judicious manner taking into consideration, overall interests of the country including security dimensions. This can have dangerous consequences especially for the security of the country with the LTTE rump very active overseas under the benign countenance of host governments.

The next step of encouraging” the Human Rights Commissioner and other unspecified relevant special procedures” with initiatives to provide advice and technical assistance on implementing those” steps (that means drawing up the time frame and the implementation process of LLRC recommendations) and making it mandatory for GOSL to accept that advice and technical assistance” removes the initiative from the GOSL and places it in the hands of the office of the High Commissioner and other relevant mandate holders.” The terminology encouraging” used here might look harmless at a glance but when read with the next provision which makes it obligatory for Sri Lanka to accept” the advice, the terminology encouraging” does not appear to so harmless.

It could even amount to ‘empowering” the High Commissioner and other special procedures to provide a blueprint such as the appointment of a Special Court for investigation into the situation in Sri Lanka, It would seem to me that Darussalam Recommendations are brought into the context here with the use of the modified terminology of relevant special procedures.”  It could be argued that the appointment of a Panel by UNSG to advice him is a special procedure and that way the Panel’s report could be brought into context as High Commissioner Navi Pillay has tried to all along. The Draft Resolution now strengthens the hands of both the Panel and the High Commissioner.

As a result of bequeathing its sovereign rights to an official and other unspecified bodies, which will result if the draft resolution is adopted as it is, will place Sri Lanka in an unenviable situation of cutting the ground under its own feet.

If adopted the Draft Resolution will also become a precedent which will apply to other country situations.


It is just as well to remember that Sierra Leone was persuaded by special agreement with UN to agree to render to the Court to be established, primacy over domestic prosecutions in Sierra Leone and to issue binding orders to the government of Sierra Leone.

It should also be noted that the US sponsored Draft Resolution incorporates a binding order on Sri Lanka to accept the advice and technical assistance on the implementation of LLRC recommendations including the time frame. Though not as explicit as the Agreement between UN and the Sierra Leone government, such a Resolution could finally lead Sri Lanka to a ‘no return’ situation. With the first objective achieved at the level of the UN High Commissioner, the theatre could move to the Security Council itself, with Russia and China unable to assist Sri Lanka in a situation where it has been persuaded /compelled to surrender. The Resolution could be manipulated by the High Commissioner to achieve a similar objective as in Sierra Leone through this short –cut procedure, reference to Security Council already being mandated under the unspecified” relevant special procedure” provision.

Security Council Impotent

Presently, there is no possibility in respect of Sri Lanka to invoke a consensus at the Security Council as the US and her allies did in the case of former Yugoslavia despite Russian protest, or the way, they roped in Russia and China to support the liquidation of Libya more recently on the grounds of providing ‘protective’ air cover but in reality supporting the rebels and even conducting air attacks as the French Air Force did on government installations; or the way consensus was achieved in dealing with atrocities committed in Rwanda. In the circumstances, an alternative possible for action in respect of Sri Lanka was to go along with the Government of Sri Lanka on the appointment of an internal mechanism and supporting its recommendations.

The ground was prepared by commissioning a panel report in the guise of advising the UNSG which was followed by other inputs as Channel 4 Video. (Even an untrained mind can see that the so called naked victims of execution are light complexioned in contrast to dark complexioned and sun-baked LTTE carders. This is not the first time. In 1984, the French state television showed dead bodies of Moro insurgents as Tamil Tiger victims and on my protest admitted their error and provided half an hour interview for me at the next news reading of the day).

 US support for Moon Panelists

The US supported such an approach though Ban-ki Moon’s private Panelists had different views on the LLRC. Even at the current sessions of UNHRC, the US Under Secretary Maria Otero spoke in favour of the  LLRC’s findings but the US’s true position was revealed in the statement of John Mariz later on when he stated that the LLRC report did not include any plan to implement its recommendations, nor did  it adequately address the crucial issue of accountability. So it is clear that despite Mariz’s reservations, all round pressures are on Sri Lanka to agree to a tight implementation schedule of the LRRC recommendations.

 Strengthening of HR High Commissioner

The objective is also intended, in the circumstances of having no  prospects for a role for the Security Council, to strengthen the hand of the Office of the Human Rights High Commissioner ‘as the originating body’ which could take action to ‘advice’ the Government of Sri Lanka on the conduct an [independent] investigation on Sri Lanka, and binding Sri Lanka to such action. It is just not the UNHRC which is the elected body which is in focus but the High Commissioner’s Office which could spring into action. It is clear from the pronouncements of the High Commissioner that she is just seeking that role where the UNSG is unable to initiate any action.

The reference to empowering [other] unspecified relevant mandate holders’ in an ENABLING Resolution is never heard of. Who are these ‘relevant mandate holders’? Why cannot they be named specifically? In my view, it has a purpose. It is, perhaps, to enable reference to the Security Council once the Resolution is passed and the High Commissioner takes the steps provided in the Resolution and Sri Lanka is made to comply with the procedure laid down in the Resolution in its present form. In that event, there is nothing much that Russia and China which have been supporting Sri Lanka by preventing a discussion in the Security Council could do except to go along as they did in other cases.

 Dangerous Precedent

It is then a very dangerous precedent creating procedure to allow the office of an official like the High Commissioner to initiate action untrammelled by the elected members of the UNHRC. The present incumbent’s actions have amply demonstrated the course of action she has planned out. It is no different from what the Darussman Panelists Trio have proposed, i.e., passing on investigations to an independent body. It is now seen that the High Commissioner is the one who is making effective use of the Darussman report and not UNSG who seems to have abdicated the responsibility to her.

There is no possibility of appointing a special court for Sri Lanka under the present circumstances [for example, as in the case of former Yugoslavia (ITCY) and Rwanda (ITCR) ].as the ‘…. independent authority’ which both the Panelists and High Commissioner seeks to establish. This is why both parties are supporting the US sponsored resolution which empowers the High Commissioner in the first instance.

 Sierra Leone Model for Sri Lanka

But the way the situation is developing, there is prospect of trapping the govt. of Sri Lanka to agree to an arrangement like adopted in the case of Sierra Leone. In the latter case, the Special Court which was finally appointed was a hybrid consisting of both international and Sierra Leonean staff members and differed to some extent from the two ad hoc tribunals”, the ICTY and ICT R. The Sierra Leonean Court, as outlined at the beginning, is based on a treaty agreement between the U.N. and the Sierra Leonean government. Following that agreement, on August 14, 2000, the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 1315, which requested “the Secretary-General to negotiate an agreement with the Government of Sierra Leone to create an independent special court,” whose jurisdiction “should include notably crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious violations of international humanitarian law,” and whose personal jurisdiction would be “over persons who bear the greatest responsibility” for these crimes “including those leaders who, in committing such crimes, have threatened the establishment of and implementation of the peace process in Sierra Leone.” The Security Council asked the Secretary-General to produce a detailed blueprint for the special court.

Unlike the ad hoc tribunals, the Special Court in respect of Sierra Leone cannot assert primacy over national courts of other states nor can it mandate the handover of accused individuals located in another state but there was no obstruction to proceedings as all suspects were under the custody of the Sierra Leone authorities. But this was no impediment to the proceedings as most of the suspects were in custody in Sierra Leone.

The Sierra Leone situation then offers some parallels to Sri Lanka’s situation in that like Sri Lanka requesting the Norwegians to facilitate/mediate in a settlement of the conflict, the Sierra Leone government was looking for an effort to break the cycle of violence and begin the process of reconciliation. In the case of Sri Lanka, there was no request for the UN to intervene in ending the conflict – that was a wise move – and the opening for the UN did not present itself. It was done through the Norwegian facilitator who turned mediator. However, soon after the end of the war, UNSG after a visit to the island and an aerial inspection of war ravaged areas, began to speak of ‘accountability’. He appointed a panel to advice him personally on the course of direction he should take.

Attempts by the US to discuss Sri Lanka at the Security Council was thwarted by Russian and Chinese intervention. The Panelists through their present intervention are trying to bring it (their report)  to the arena of public domain and create new space for its discussion in the background of the US sponsored Draft Resolution.

Mr.Moon’s initiative, which is rather unusual, appeared to be an attempt to find an alternative way to surface the Sri Lankan issue. The venue has been shifted to UNHRC in Geneva with the High Commissioner Navi Pillay playing the lead role. Her stance of calling for the appointment of an independent investigating authority and Mr. Moon’s private Panel’s findings coincide.


As I see the scenario discussed above sets out what might emerge if the Draft Resolution goes through as it is. The initial acceptance of the findings of the LLRC recommendations by the US before delegate John Martiz dissected it and found there was no accountability and a time frame, seemed to have been intended to prod the Sri Lankan delegation to a path of complacency and concentrate on the LLRC recommendations and their implementation.

Minister Samarasinghe’s statement only tried to downgrade the growing opposition calling it the result of misinformation by the Diaspora and other interested parties. Some have seen this as diplomacy. I would not. The Minister missed, if not ignored, the far more insidious underlying plan behind the movers of the Draft Resolution. That is the one that the Sri Lankan delegation should have comprehended and understood with its damaging implications for Sri Lanka as well as on other countries which provided grounds for building up a broad consensus against the Draft Resolution.

The main thrust of our strategy then should have been to tackle the issue of this danger emanating from empowering the office of the UNHRC High Commissioner and unspecified relevant mandated bodies” with authority to act where the Security Council has become impotent. It can be seen that even India despite her prevarications/vacillations seems to be concerned over Clause 3 of the Draft Resolution. That provision can boomerang on India herself as much as many other countries which have skeletons in their own cupboards.

I doubt if that opportunity was used by the Sri Lanka delegation except in statements made later by Ambassador Kunanayakam after Minister Samarasighe left Geneva.

Dr. G. L.Peiris, Minister of External Affairs, as a rare legal brain could not have missed to see these implications and I am sure he would have emphasized it during his meetings with African leaders. I say African leaders because he was seen visiting these countries leaving the affairs in Geneva to Minister Samarasinghe. Looking at the list of geographical groups, it seems to me the large African group vote is vital. Building up contacts with African countries should have been a continuing process and not one to be put off for the last minute. So are the links with the Arab group. This was what I was doing in Paris for ten years as Minister of the Embassy and later as Ambassador. I was the governmentt’s link with the Arab League visiting the head quarter in Tunis and also Algiers as special envoy several times, including the 25th anniversary  celebration of the Algerian Revolution though I was not the accredited Ambassador to these places. This does not mean we should overlook Asia. One sees how Philippines seems to be defying us. This is understandable. So is the Latin American/Caribbean group. One should not underestimate US’s coercive influence in all these areas. The task appears formidable with all the forces converging on Geneva against Sri Lanka.

In the final analysis, for the US and the West, the moves at foot appear to be aimed at a regime change they are looking for their own reasons. Regime changes have taken place in countries of Sri Lanka’s intimate circle. Others are being threatened. The enthroning of the US led Draft Resolution in support of which all forces have been mustered, not excluding the Catholic Bishop of Mannar, Rev. Rayappu, Rev.Desmond Tutu, the Panelists, Channel Four Video, the Diaspora, the NGOS, may point to a determined effort put several leading personalities in the country behind bars. That is how it is sought to effect the regime change.

The success of the Resolution at the UNHRC itself could also see the country being led to chaos, divided again and even with the prospects of a permanent division looming in the distance rather than leading to a real reconciliation process. The government has to take strong security precautions like strengthening of naval surveillance and military readiness to meet an eventuality.

Sri Lanka’s Initial Response 

In the beginning itself, confusion was created by spreading news that Sri Lanka was ready to discuss” the draft Resolution with its movers. The Sri Lankan Ministerial delegation led by Mahinda Samarasinghe swallowed the bait and started with a denial of such discussions but the ploy had its result. Samarasinghe took up a less adversarial outlook in his statement than what the Sri Lankan Foreign Office was thinking of. The latter was for no negotiations’ or ‘no surrender of principles’ approach. That was perhaps demonstrated by External Affairs Minister, Dr.G.L.Peiris considering the invitation of State Secretary Hillary Clinton as a lesser priority. Critics who are not familiar with diplomatic nuances have criticized Dr Peiris for not taking the opportunity but perhaps, he saw it as a trap and avoided it. Such a visit would not have stopped America going ahead with its plan of submitting a Draft Resolution. On the contrary, the pre Council sessions scenario in Geneva trapped Minister Samarasinghe to a conciliatory and defensive position.

[The writer was a senior Sri Lankan diplomat in Europe for over ten years and was Ambassador to France, Switzerland, Spain and the Vatican. He was honoured by Pope John Paul II with the Vatican’s highest honour and was the first Sri Lankan Ambassador to receive that honour).

Government Defiance Pays Off: UNHRC Draft Resolution Falls Well Short of Tamil Demands

March 6th, 2014

Dilrook Kannangara

Sri Lankan government should be congratulated for its defiance against threats by the UNHRC Chief, many rapporteurs, US diplomats, British PM, Indian foreign minister and PM, TNA politicians, NGO camp and the likes of Dayan Jayatillake. They knew very well UNHRC has no mandate to impose an international investigation as it violates the supreme concept of sovereignty on which the UN is based. Knowing very well their inability to impose international investigations, demilitarisation demands and devolution demands, they opted for fear tactics. They hoped for an out of court settlement”. However, the government stood firm and rejected their threats.

 Now the terror and extortion camp has realised their inability to impose international investigations, demilitarisation and devolution demands and have backtracked. The draft resolution leaked” to the media has none of these!
Government defiance paid off well.
The draft resolution has no more teeth than the 2012 and 2013 resolutions. It makes no reference to an international investigation, war crimes, genocide, further demilitarisation, devolution, 13A and political solutions. Most of these are beyond the mandate of the UNHRC.
Diego Garcia Replacement in Sri Lanka at the Heart of UNHRC Resolutions
USA has gone into panic mode over the expiration of the lease in Diego Garcia islands forcibly occupied by the British and leased to a US military base until 2016. The lease must be extended by 2014 or it expires. UK faces severe legal and community challenges from Chagossians over the forcible occupation and genocide therein. An ICC case is pending against UK occupation. Pull-out date (end 2014) from Afghanistan was also set taking into account these pending complications. However, against all morality, human rights and sovereignty of Chagossians, UK may well extend the lease. However, it is a risk USA is unwilling to take concerning the most strategic foreign military base.  Invasions of Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq and many other naval, air and other military operations in Asia (excluding Far East Asia) were carried out from Diego Garcia. It is the only foreign nuclear weapons deployed US base. In view of these complications, USA is looking for alternative bases in the region. Northern, north Western and North Eastern Sri Lanka offer the best location for US military basing. UNHRC resolutions against Sri Lanka are aimed at coercing Sri Lankan government to give into a US military base. Failing which USA plans to stir chaos in the island, intervene and occupy under the guise of protecting human rights.
USA intervened in former Yugoslavia under the pretext of protecting human rights. But it was obvious the occupation was to disrupt Russia and extend NATO eastward.
Mauritius cosponsoring the US resolution against Sri Lanka this year further confirms this. Mauritius has claimed the Diego Garcia islands. Therefore it is in their interest that USA finds an alternative military base elsewhere so that the territory they claim would be released.
Perfect Replacement
During the war, USA helped Sri Lanka rid Tamil terrorists. US defence expertise flowed free of charge in the form of advice in 2000 which among other advice included the need to stock cluster munitions, fortify the navy and enhance air and ground capabilities. USA was generous to hand over a warship to Sri Lanka and provided vital satellite data on LTTE floating weapons warehouses. USA was the first country to ban the LTTE (since 1991) and hunted down Tamil front organisations. In 2006 FBI arrested 15 Tamils trying to buy weapons for the LTTE. Despite all this help, USA swiftly changed its position on Lanka after the war.
US help during the war must be looked at from the point of view of their interests, not out of humanity or the concern for Sri Lankans. USA intended Sri Lanka to cleanse the north and the east of terrorists so that it can occupy for a military base. After the extermination of Tamil terrorists, the north is perfectly safe for US military basing.
USA made no secret of their military plans for the north of the island. Several approaches were made on Trincomalee; a US listening station and transmission station was set up in Iranawila (north western Sri Lanka) and an American Centre was set up in Jaffna. US defence officials were regular visitors to the island during the War on Terror. USA carried out at least 5 joint naval and air force drills with Sri Lankan counterparts since the war ended familiarising their troops with the Lankan territory.
War displaced millions from the north making it less populated than otherwise. Sri Lankan military has been greatly reduced by the demilitarization demand. There is fast and easy access to shipping lanes with the potential of introducing access denial against China and India (two fastest growing economies of the world). Northern Sri Lanka has a Tamil majority which can be very easily manipulated as the people of Kosovo or Okinawa, to agree to any US military presence.
John Kerry report (2009) identifies further reasons for US strategic interests in the island.
These are the driving forces behind intriguing US action on Sri Lanka. UNHRC is just a tool the US use to achieve its military objectives and hegemony. Anti-Sri Lanka resolutions will die a natural death in two years (2016) as the Diego Garcia issues would have settled by then one way or the other. Until then the nation will have to put up with toothless UNHRC resolutions.   
Dayan and Other Extortionists
Obviously Dayan Jayatillake, TNA, Tamil Nadu and the LTTE Rump are disappointed with the draft US resolution. There are no demands in it for international investigations, genocide, demilitarisation and devolution. They have done well to conceal their defeat and disappointment.
Faced with this humiliation they try to terrorise the Lankan government to give into their demands, mostly Tamil racist demands denied to the LTTE including demilitarisation and devolution. Nothing should be entertained. There is absolutely no reason to give into any demands that are not contained in UNHRC resolutions.
The aim of Dayan and other Tamil separatists and fear mongers is to terrorise the government into submission and offer unsolicited advice leading to dividing the nation. His conduct resembles that of a classic espionage agent. Their demands also border Indian interests. India obviously doesn’t want a closer US military base but wants its own extension in the island including a permanent military base.
Way Forward: From Reconciliation to Integration
Sri Lanka must reject all UNHRC demands. UNHRC is powerless to take any action against a UN member without UN Security Council sanction which is not forthcoming. Any accountability process must essentially include the atrocities, associations and abetments of the activities of the LTTE, Tamil political parties, IPKF and India, the Tamil Diaspora, NGOs and other connected entities. A domestic investigation into their activities, past and present, will put them on the back foot. There is no further need for demilitarisation, political solutions, devolution and other Tamil demands. There is no need for the implementation of further LLRC recommendations. After all, these are only recommendations, not instructions. There is absolutely no need for a Truth Commission either.
The reconciliation process must end now as five (5) years have passed since the end of the war. A new national integration process must commence now which will unify the island nation into one unitary nation where people are united. Sri Lanka is home not just to Tamils, but also to other communities that make up more than 85% of the people. Enough preoccupation with just 15% of the people with no use for the rest and the nation. Reconciliation process must be graduated to national integration.


March 6th, 2014

Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:
March 5th, 2014 at 8:18 pm

Russia cannot be seen without including the CSTO, SCO and China. The CSTO was formed as Russia’s NATO but unlike the members of NATO the CSTO members are financially sound, rich in natural resources and strategically better placed. Many NATO members are in deep financial trouble including the US, UK, France. Putin did not take over the Crimea to engage in proposals for peace talks. Already the world has accepted the annexation of the Crimea as part of Russia.

President Obama wants to make the Ukraine a member nation of NATO. That would be handing the Ukraine to Russia for Russia will not have one of her CSTO member nations share a border with a NATO nation since Belarus is a CSTO member and shares a border with the Ukraine. Two days ago Russia launched an ICBM missile thereby violating the SALT treaty (Strategic Arms Limitations Talks) and made a mockery of the agreement Obama had with Putin a few years ago to limit the nuclear weapons stock pile of both nations.

Obama has threatened Putin that if the crisis in the Ukraine is not solved he will not attend the G8 summit and has threatened to remove Russia from the G8 nations which were formed as a collection of nations who have the strongest industrial base (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, United States,Canada and Russia) yet they do not include China which has the second largest economy in the world and Italy, Japan and the UK are in a financial trouble of some level with Italy being the worst. If Russia exits the G8, it will be the G8 that will be hurt and not Russia. If Obama does not attend the G8 meeting then Russia will prevail in that meeting. Obama has painted himself into a corner by his own inflated threats.

Russia in turn has threatened to shut the gas and oil to Europe who is dependent on Russia. In addition Russia has threatened to drop the US currency in bilateral trade. Trade between Russia and China alone is enormous since Russia is one of the main suppliers of oil to China. If China were to sell even half of our 40% debt that she holds on the open market as junk bonds the dollar will take a terrible beating. It maybe the beginning of the end of the dollar as the international currency of exchange. China in recent times wants to replace the dollar with the Yuan as the international currency of exchange. Since these bonds are sold at zero interest and China wants to replace the dollar any excuse would be sufficient for China to take this step. Recently both China and Japan dumped Billions of dollars of American bonds on the market.

The US has already lost to Russia in the middle East regarding Syria and Iran, President Obama has loosened sanctions on Iran and come to agreements which Iran now repudiates. This has caused friction between the US and her long time alley Saudi Arabia who sees a rising Persian nation armed with nuclear weapons. Most of the Arab nations now have only one option and that is to become nuclear powers themselves in order to bring balance of power in the region where Israel and now Iran hold that power. Pakistan is more than willing to supply Saudi Arabia with the technology as she did with Iran and North Korea.

Regarding China the US containment policy is not going well. Recently the US approached the Maldive nation to build a military base in that nation and was turned down, while Russia plans to build eight military bases across the world. Three of them in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua or right under the belly of the US, thereby making a mockery of the Monroe Doctrine”. two other military bases are planned for Seychelles and in Singapore which is one of four banking capitals of the world.

Recently a Muslim from the Chinese province of Xinjiang attacked and killed 33 people in a subway station and wounding several more with a knife as the separatist movement in Xinjiang continues. Pakistan under the Pakistani Taliban wants to make Pakistan into a theocracy that follows the Sharia law. They are also deeply involved in supporting the separatist movement in Xinjiang. Xinjiang is China’s largest province by land and is the richest in proven natural resources. Just a few days ago President Obama sent 1.6 Billion dollars to the Taliban controlled Pakistan. It is obvious some of this money will go to support the separatist movement in China.

At the same time President Obama wants to cut our military to pre world war 2 levels or 450 thousand men and women down from one million five hundred thousand. He also intends to cut the troops stationed in South Korea, Japan and Germany. This is not going unnoticed to China and Russia who have increased their expenditure on military spending. China has raised hers by 12% in order to create a blue water navy.

Finally the nature of Russia and China. Unlike India or the US these nations would not blink an eye if a million people die from a war but that cannot be said of the US or India where panic would be the result. This means the autocratic regimes of Russia and China are more formidable in war than the US or India.

India is caught in an odd situation. She has been recruited by the US to contain China and has approached Japan for that purpose. This puts China and India at opposite ends of the pole. While China holds 40% of the US debt both India and the US are experiencing deep economic problems. India’s growth rate has dropped from 8% to 4%. this is dangerous when 80% of her population are 40 years and younger and are of the working age. The US debt is at 17 trillion dollars (Google US national debt clock real time and see the chart. Look to the upper left to see how fast our debt is increasing). Nevertheless Washington DC. has increased the debt ceiling of the nation in order to borrow from itself another two trillion dollars. The collapse of the dollar is inevitable. A good book on this subject is the Crucible of Decline: Tottering on the fall of America” by Rocky Bagaladi.

When it comes to Sri Lanka the increasing tension between the US and NATO against China and Russia including their respective organizations the SCO and CSTO will serve well in the Security Council where issues of an international investigation on Sri Lanka will be immediately vetoed by Russia and China as they see the US is overextending her power into areas of the world that she has no business.

Latest News fron Ukraine-Washington’s Arrogance, Hubris, and Evil Have Set the Stage for War

March 6th, 2014

Russia Starts Massive Air Defense Drills Amid Crimea Standoff

MOSCOW, March 6 (RIA Novosti) – Russia’s Western Military District has begun large-scale air defense drills at its southern testing range of Kapustin Yar on the backdrop of further escalation of tensions with the West over Ukraine.

Kapustin Yar, located some 450 kilometers (280 miles) east of the Ukrainian border, will host about 3,500 troops and over 1,000 units of military hardware for about a month. The exercise will culminate with live-firing drills, involving S-300, Buk-M1 and other air defense systems.

It is for the first time that all air defense units from the district, including coastal defenses of the Northern Fleet, have gathered in one place,” said the district’s spokesman, Col. Oleg Kochetkov.

It is the largest-ever exercise held by air defense units of the Western Military District,” Kochetkov said, adding that the drills were part of a regular combat training cycle.

The exercise, however, coincides with further escalation of a political crisis in Ukraine that has led to the current standoff between Russia and the West over the fate of Crimea, an autonomous Ukrainian region with a majority ethnic Russian population.

Crimean authorities have refused to recognize as legitimate the new central government in Kiev, which ousted President Viktor Yanukovych late last month, and on Thursday they announced a decision to become part of Russia.

A popular vote to approve the decision will be held in Crimea on March 16.

Russia’s parliament has recently approved military intervention in Ukraine, while thousands of local militia” allegedly under Russian command have taken control over Ukrainian military bases across Crimea in the past week.

Following these developments, the West showered Moscow with accusations of aggression and threats of sanctions while cutting off military exchanges with Russia and scrambling to bolster military cooperation within NATO.

The Pentagon announced plans on Wednesday to expand combat pilot training in Poland and to send six additional F-15C fighter jets to a NATO mission carrying out air patrols over Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Patrols have been carried out on a three- to four-month rotation basis by 14 NATO states from Lithuania’s air base in Zokniai, near the northern city of Siauliai, since 2004 when the ex-Soviet republics joined the alliance.

The Estonian military said Thursday that the six US fighter jets as well as two KC-135 aerial refueling tankers landed at Zokniai, joining four US F-15s deployed there since January.

Full Story

Washington’s Arrogance, Hubris, and Evil Have Set the Stage for War

By Paul Craig Roberts

Washington's Arrogance, Hubris, and Evil Have Set the Stage for War. 52338.jpeg

In some quarters public awareness is catching up with Stephen Lendman, Michel Chossudovsky, Rick Rozoff, myself and a few others in realizing the grave danger in the crisis that Washington has created in Ukraine.

The puppet politicians who Washington intended to put in charge of Ukraine have lost control to organized and armed neo-nazis, who are attacking Jews, Russians, and intimidating Ukrainian politicians. The government of Crimea, a Russian province that Khrushchev transferred to the Ukraine Soviet Republic in the 1950s, has disavowed the illegitimate government that illegally seized power in Kiev and requested Russian protection. The Ukrainian military forces in Crimea have gone over to Russia. The Russian government has announced that it will also protect the former Russian provinces in eastern Ukraine as well.

As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn pointed out, it was folly for the Communist Party of the Soviet Union to transfer historic provinces of Russia into Ukraine. At the time it seemed to the Soviet leadership like a good thing to do. Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and had been ruled by Russia since the 18th century. Adding Russian territory to Ukraine served to water down the nazi elements in western Ukraine that had fought for Hitler during World War 2. Perhaps another factor in the enlargement of Ukraine was the fact of Khrushchev’s Ukrainian heritage.

Regardless, it did not matter until the Soviet Union and then the former Russian empire itself fell apart. Under Washington’s pressure, Ukraine became a separate country retaining the Russian provinces, but Russia retained its Black Sea naval base in Crimea.

Washington tried, but failed, to take Ukraine in 2004 with the Washington-financed “Orange Revolution.” According to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, since this failure Washington has “invested” $5 billion in Ukraine in order to foment agitation for EU membership for Ukraine. EU membership would open Ukraine to looting by Western bankers and corporations, but Washington’s main goal is to establish US missile bases on Russia’s border with Ukraine and to deprive Russia of its Black Sea naval base and military industries in eastern Ukraine. EU membership for Ukraine means NATO membership.

Full Story

Ukrainian Neo-Nazis Declare that Power Comes Out of the Barrels of their Guns

Ukrainian Neo-Nazis Declare that Power Comes Out of the Barrels of their Guns

Paul Craig Roberts

Reality on the ground in Ukraine contradicts the incompetent and immoral Obama regime’s portrait of Ukrainian democracy on the march.

To the extent that government exists in post-coup Ukraine, it is laws dictated by gun and threat wielding thugs of the neo-Nazi, Russophobic, ultra-nationalist, right-wing parties. Watch the video of the armed thug, Aleksandr Muzychko, who boosts of killing Russian soldiers in Chechnya, dictating to the Rovno regional parliament a grant of apartments to families of protesters.

Read about the neo-nazis intimidating the Central Election Commission in order to secure rule and personnel changes in order to favor the ultra-right in the forthcoming elections. Thug Aleksandr Shevchenko informed the CEC that armed activists will remain in CEC offices in order to make certain that the election is not rigged against the neo-nazis. What he means, of course, is the armed thugs will make sure the neo-nazis win. If the neo-nazis don’t win, the chances are high that they will take power regardless.

Members of President Yanukovich’s ruling party, the Party of Regions, have been shot, had arrest warrants issued for them, have experienced home invasions and physical threats, and are resigning in droves in hopes of saving the lives of themselves and their families. The prosecutor’s office in the Volyn region (western Ukraine) has been ordered by ultra-nationalists to resign en masse .

Jewish synagogs and Eastern Orthodox Christian churches are being attacked.

To toot my own horn, I might have been the first and only to predict that Washington’s organization of pro-EU Ukrainian politicians into a coup against the elected government of Ukraine would destroy democracy and establish the precedent that force prevails over elections, thereby empowering the organized and armed extreme right-wing.

This is precisely what has happened. Note that there was no one in the Obama regime who had enough sense to see the obvious result of their smug, self-satisfied interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine.

If a democratically elected president and ruling party are so easily driven from power by armed neo-nazis, what chance do Washington’s paid stooges among the so-called moderates” have of forming a government? These are the corrupt people who wanted President Yanukovich out of office so that they could take the money instead. The corruption charge against Yanukovich was cover for the disloyal, undemocratic moderate” schemers to seize power and be paid millions of dollars by Washington for taking Ukraine into the EU and NATO.

Full Story

Crimean parliament votes to join Russia, hold referendum in 10 days on ratifying

The Crimean parliament has voted for the region to join Russia. The decision will only come in force if approved by the Crimeans at a referendum which will be held in 10 days.

Crimean MPs voted on Thursday for the region to to become part of the Russian Federation as its constituent territory,” says the text of the regional parliament’s statement.

78 MPs said yes to Crimea joining Russia, while 8 abstained from voting.

When the decision was announced to several thousand people waiting outside the parliament building, they, according to Itar-Tass, welcomed the news with cheers and screams of Russia!”

The parliament has also made a decision to ask the Russian leadership to launch the procedure of Crimea becoming part of Russia.”

The speaker of the Crimean parliament, Vladimir Konstantinov, explained that the parliament’s decision on the region joining Russia still has to be approved at a referendum, which has been scheduled for March 16. That’s two weeks earlier than announced last week.

We are not in a rush, but that’s what the current situation demands,” Konstantinov told Itar-Tass. ‘We are trying to address the sentiments currently shared by the population. Those are uncertainty and fear. We must give them confidence and offer a clear political way out of the crisis.

There will be two questions on the Crimean referendum ballots.

The first one: Are you in favor of Crimea becoming a constituent territory of the Russian Federation. The second one: Are you in favor of restoring Crimea’s 1992 constitution,” the autonomous region’s First Deputy-Premier Rustam Temirgaliev said.

According to the 1992 constitution, the autonomous republic is part of Ukraine but has relations with Kiev, defined on the basis of mutual agreements.

The variant which gets the simple majority will be the winner in the referendum.

Full Story

Obama: Crimea Separation Would Violate Law

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says a referendum for Ukraine’s Crimea region to separate and become part of Russia would violate international law.

Local government officials in Crimea on Thursday set a March 16 for the referendum vote.

Obama told reporters at the White House that would also violate the Ukrainian constitution.

Full Story

US fighter jets, warship arrive in Ukraine region

Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon says six U.S. F-15 fighter jets have arrived in Lithuania to bolster air patrols over the Baltics as the stand-off over Russia’s military incursion into Ukraine continues. A U.S. warship is also now in the Black Sea to participate in long-planned exercises.

The fighter jets and 60 U.S. military personnel landed at Siauliai Air Base in Lithuania, adding to the four F-15s and 150 troops already there to do the air patrol mission. The additional fighters came from RAF Lakenheath.

The Navy destroyer USS Truxtun is participating in exercises with Romania and Bulgaria and is expected to be in the Black Sea for several days.

Full Story

THE ROVING EYE -Spring fails in Ukrainian plunderland
By Pepe Escobar

Here’s the US’s exceptionalist promotion of “democracy” in action; Washington has recognized a coup d’etat in Ukraine that regime-changed a – for all its glaring faults – democratically elected government.

And here is Russian President Vladimir Putin, already last year, talking about how Russia and China decided to trade in roubles and yuan, and stressing how Russia needs to quit the “excessive monopoly” of the US dollar. He had to be aware the Empire would strike back.

Now there’s more; Russian presidential adviser Sergey GlazyevTHE ROVING EYE
Spring fails in Ukrainian plunderland
By Pepe Escobar

Here’s the US’s exceptionalist promotion of “democracy” in action; Washington has recognized a coup d’etat in Ukraine that regime-changed a – for all its glaring faults – democratically elected government.

And here is Russian President Vladimir Putin, already last year, talking about how Russia and China decided to trade in roubles and yuan, and stressing how Russia needs to quit the “excessive monopoly” of the US dollar. He had to be aware the Empire would strike back.

Now there’s more; Russian presidential adviser Sergey Glazyev

told RIA Novosti, “Russia will abandon the US dollar as a reserve currency if the United States initiates sanctions against the Russian Federation.”

So the Empire struck back by giving “a little help” to regime change in the Ukraine. And Moscow counter-punched by taking control of Crimea in less than a day without firing a shot – with or without crack Spetsnaz brigades (UK-based think tanks say they are; Putin says they are not).

Putin’s assessment of what happened in Ukraine is factually correct; “an anti-constitutional takeover and armed seizure of power”. It’s open to endless, mostly nasty debate whether the Kremlin overreacted or not. Considering the record of outright demonization of both Russia and Putin going on for years – and now reaching fever pitch – the Kremlin’s swift reaction was quite measured.

Putin applied Sun Tzu to the letter, and now plays the US against the EU. He has made it clear Moscow does not need to “invade” Ukraine. The 1997 Ukraine-Russia partition treaty specifically allows Russian troops in Crimea. And Russia after all is an active proponent of state sovereignty; it’s under this principle that Moscow refuses a Western “intervention” in Syria.

What he left the door open for is – oh cosmic irony of ironies – an American invention/intervention (and that, predictably, was undetectable by Western corporate media); the UN’s R2P – “responsibility to protect” – in case the Western-aligned fascists and neo-nazis in Ukraine threaten Russians or Russian-speaking civilians with armed conflict. Samantha Power should be proud of herself.

Full Story

Ukraine: The clash of partnerships

John Feffer

The Cold War is history. For those growing up today, the Cold War is as distant in time as World War II was for those came of age in the 1970s. In both cases, empires collapsed and maps were redrawn. Repugnant ideologies were laid bare and then laid to rest, though patches of nostalgia persist.

Surely the Cold War has been consigned to the textbooks as irrevocably as the Battle of the Bulge. The Berlin Wall is in pieces. The US president speaks of the abolition of nuclear weapons. The “common European home” from the Atlantic to the Urals – a conceit embraced by such odd bedfellows as De Gaulle and Gorbachev – beckons on the horizon, with the OSCE in place andUkraine: The clash of partnerships
John Feffer

The Cold War is history. For those growing up today, the Cold War is as distant in time as World War II was for those came of age in the 1970s. In both cases, empires collapsed and maps were redrawn. Repugnant ideologies were laid bare and then laid to rest, though patches of nostalgia persist.

Surely the Cold War has been consigned to the textbooks as irrevocably as the Battle of the Bulge. The Berlin Wall is in pieces. The US president speaks of the abolition of nuclear weapons. The “common European home” from the Atlantic to the Urals – a conceit embraced by such odd bedfellows as De Gaulle and Gorbachev – beckons on the horizon, with the OSCE in place and

the European Union creeping ever eastward. Tensions inevitably crop up, but they’re nothing worth exchanging inter-continental ballistic missile’s over.

What was once confrontation has turned into joint efforts to address global challenges: stabilizing the world economy, negotiating nuclear agreements with Iran, ending the war in Syria. A long article in The New Yorker on a multi-billion dollar nuclear fusion project being constructed in France reminds us that this quest for a sustainable replacement for fossil fuels began as a late-Cold War agreement between Moscow and Washington. Impending environmental catastrophe is gradually uniting all sides in much the same way that Ronald Reagan once imagined that a Martian invasion would.

And then there’s Ukraine.

Just when you thought it was safe to get back into geopolitics, the Cold War has reared its ugly head once again. All your favorite characters have returned to the footlights – the iron-fisted Russian leader, the thundering American secretary of state, troops of multiple nations on alert, and lots of cloak-and-dagger intrigue behind the scenes. And starring in the role of Prague 1968 is that new and untested actor: Crimea 2014. We can only hope that history is repeating itself as farce, not as a tragic tale told twice.

Full Story

Reading Putin’s mind over Crimea
By Mikhail A Molchanov

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

Western pundits cry foul over Russian intervention in the Crimea and deplore a purported resurrection of 19th-century power politics by President Vladimir Putin. They forget he learned his tactics from the US’s and North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s constant reliance on brute force.

Why exactly is NATO still in existence 23 years after the end of the Cold war? Back in the 1990s, Russia’s liberal reformers expected it to go the way of the Warsaw Pact. This hope wasbluntly defeated by Western proponents of global interdependence and co-prosperity. Instead, the Euro-Atlantic alliance started an eastward creep, with plans to encircle Russia and gobble up Moscow’s former allies.

Perhaps NATO means to include Russia as well? This is what Putin suggested in an early 2000 interview with the BBC: “We believe we can talk about more profound integration with NATO, but only if Russia is regarded as an equal partner.” Not so fast, was the response from Brussels. No equality between the Cold war “winners” and “losers” was ever on the cards.

Putin was the head of Russia’s Federal Security Service when the NATO bombs were falling on Belgrade. Russia could do nothing at the time. In 2003, the United States led the so-called “coalition of the willing” in the unlawful invasion of Iraq in clear violation of the UN Charter. Again, Russia could do little.

In 2004, United States spent US$40 million on the “orange revolution” in Ukraine, when street crowds forced the government into an unprecedented re-run of the presidential election. The ensuing government of the inept, US-dependent president Viktor Yushchenko succeeded in damaging Russian-Ukrainian relations and creating an atmosphere of intolerance for Ukraine’s ethnic Russian minority and their linguistic and cultural rights.

Corruption proliferated. Ukrainian people’s response to the “orange” lawlessness was the election of Viktor Yanukovych – the same person that Yushchenko defeated, with American help, in the third round of 2004 elections.

By the end of his second term in the office, Putin must have lost all doubt as to the real motivation behind the US championing of “democracy” world-wide – to expand its sphere of influence and prolong its global hegemony while eliminating and weakening potential rivals by all means available, not excluding crude military power. He witnessed, and could not prevent, the unlawful dismemberment of Serbia and the quick recognition that Western powers hastened to grant to the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo.

Full Story

Latest News from Ukraine-Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders – leaked EU’s Ashton phone tape

March 6th, 2014

Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders – leaked EU’s Ashton phone tape

The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister, which has emerged online.There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition,” Urmas Paet said during the conversation.I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh,” Ashton answered.The call took place after Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet visited Kiev on February 25, following the peak of clashes between the pro-EU protesters and security forces in the Ukrainian capital.

Full Report

Estonian Foreign Ministry confirms authenticity of leaked call on Kiev snipers

Estonian foreign ministry has confirmed the recording of his conversation with EU foreign policy chief is authentic. Urmas Paet said that snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were hired by Maidan leaders.

Paet told RIA-Novosti news agency that he talked to Catherine Ashton last week right after retiring from Kiev, but refrained from further comments, saying that he has to listen to the tape first.”

It’s very disappointing that such surveillance took place altogether. It’s not a coincidence that this conversation was uploaded [to the web] today,” he stressed.

My conversation with Ashton took place last week right after I returned from Kiev. At that time I was already in Estonia,” Paet added.

Paet also gave a press conference about the leaked tape on Wednesday, saying that the dramatic events in Kiev, which resulted in people being killed, must become the subject of an independent investigation.

The Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs also issued a statement on its website, saying that the recording of the leaked telephone conversation between Paet and Ashton is authentic.”

Full Story

Those who seized power in Kiev want to sour relations between West & Russia – Lavrov

The suggestion of Kiev’s new self-proclaimed government to swap economic aid for the placement of US missile defense shield looks too much like an attempt to sour relations between the West and Russia, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Financial aid to the self-proclaimed government in Kiev is currently being discussed, with US secretary of state John Kerry arriving on Tuesday. Although the Russian Foreign Minister said it had heard no previous mention of the swap, earlier on Wednesday, Ukraine’s ambassador to Belorus, Mikhail Ezhal did mention that such an idea was in the works. When asked about this suggestion at a news conference with his Spanish counterpart, Lavrov said that ” if it is true, then we have another example wherein, completely unhindered by our Western partners, those who have taken over the Rada are trying to gamble on the relationship between Russia and the West, and are trying to cause frictions in this relationship with their attempts at fishing in murky waters.”

Lavrov, for his part, believes that such ways of doing business aren’t serious enough and that “our Western partners are well aware of these games.”

Full Story

Ron Paul: US shouldn’t meddle in Ukraine

Former presidential hopeful and long-time lawmaker Ron Paul told RT that he doesn’t think the United States should get involved any further in the escalating situation in Ukraine.

Paul, a staunch non-interventionist who last year retired from Congress after more than a quarter-century, said during an exclusive interview with RT on Wednesday that there’s no sense” in having America entangled in the overseas standoff.

I don’t think we have any business there,” Paul told RT from his office in Texas this week.

Tensions in the European country have worsened in recent weeks, particularly after President Viktor Yanukovych was ousted in February amid fiery anti-government protests in the capital city of Kiev. Violence quickly spread to other regions of the country, particularly in Crimea where local authorities have refused to recognize the new Ukrainian government and have established self-defense militias.

I think it would be nice if we considered the Ukrainians. It’s their civil strike, their civil war, and deciding who to run that country should be left to them,” Paul told RT. Unfortunately, others get involved and it seems like its irresistible for the US to be involved.”

Full Story

Ukraine crisis: Urgent talks, angry words, but still no coherent plan to end Crimea’s stand-off

French officials said that Mr Lavrov had refused to recognise Mr Deshchytsia’s legitimacy as a representative of the Ukrainian people – sticking to Moscow’s line that the change of government in Kiev last month was an illegal” coup.

Full Sory


Russians retake Ukraine regional HQ

Pro-Moscow youths recaptured the administrative headquarters of the eastern city of Donetsk and flew the Russian flag from its roof on Wednesday, hours after Kiev’s authorities managed to fly their own flag there for the first time since Saturday.
About 1,000 pro-Russian protesters took back the regional government building in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk on Wednesday, leaving around a dozen people injured, a reporter witnessed.

For Full Story

Questions on Ukraine the West chooses not to answer

Ukrainian and Western refusal to answer Moscow’s hard questions explains Russia’s tough stance on the crisis in Kiev.

Ignoring Russian concerns is a western habit adopted after the Soviet Union’s collapse; when NATO bombed Yugoslavia; during the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state, and the US push to install an anti-missile shield over Europe that can target Russia.

It also happened recently when western diplomats flocked to Ukraine to smile and wave and lobby their interests in a future Ukrainian government, while accusing Russia of meddling in Ukrainian affairs.

But it seems that in Ukraine lies Russia’s red line and Moscow no longer takes don’t know, don’t care” for an answer.

Here’s the questions.

Full Story

Officials of Crimean government to arrive in Moscow this week

This week, the delegation from the Autonomous Republic of Crimea is to arrive in Moscow. The Crimean authorities intend to hold a meeting with State Duma deputies.
According to the head of the Supreme Council of the Crimea, Vladimir Konstantinov, the agenda of the meeting is currently being formed. A wide range of questions will be discussed – from the provision of medicines and food to energy. In addition, the Crimean authorities are concerned about the upcoming tourist season.

For Full Story

Crimea asks $6 billion from Russia

Crimea asks $6 billion from Russia. 52324.jpeg

The government of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea asks Russia to provide economic aid in the amount of six billion dollars. One billion would be direct financial support, whereas the remaining five would serve as investment, vice-speaker of the Federation Council Yevgeny Bushmin said.

The Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation has drawn up a plan of assistance that would soon be sent to the government for approval in the coming days.

Full Sory

Silence on Lanka Resolution – March 5,2014

March 6th, 2014

Ira de Silva London,  Canada

The Editor, Letters
The Telegraph
Calcutta, India

Dear Sir:

It is indicated that India and Sri Lanka were “non-committal” on the third resolution against Sri Lanka tabled at the UNHCR in Geneva. No one in Sri Lanka will find that surprising because they know that India will as usual vote against Sri Lanka although  Mr. Singh claims to be “thinking about it” as he has done in the past and Sri Lanka is well aware of India’s constant harassment of Sri Lanka based on the claim that they want to help the Sri Lankan Tamils to which end they created a terrorist group and terrorized Sri Lanka just to win elections in Tamil Nadu. After the defeat of the leadership of the Tamil terrorists, India is now resorting to “diplomatic terrorism” against Sri Lanka because of the upcoming Indian election.

Mr. Rajapakse is well aware that India will again vote against Sri Lanka so he is “non-committal” in public but Sri Lankans hope that in private he has indicated to Mr. Singh that Sri Lanka is tired of India’s interference and aggresssion. They hope that he has indicated to Mr. Singh that Sri Lanka will not tolerate India’s interference because like him, Mr. Rajapakse will only win the next election if he can tell the Sri Lankan voter that he has taken a stand against India. He won the last time because he defeated the Tamil terrorists, next time he will only win if he stands firm against India and defeats Indian interference in the internal matters of Sri Lanka, stops the Indians from poaching in Sri Lankan waters and does not allow  votes in Tamil Nadu to influence him to harass another sovereign country.

Any investigation should include the role that India has played in terrorism in Sri Lanka and particularly the massive human rights abuses of the Indian forces in Sri Lanka because these Indian forces killed thousands of Tamils (Tamil genocide) 4000 rapes documented, shelled the Jaffna hospital killing doctors, nurses and patients just to name a few FACTS documented by the Indians themselves. This is the India that created, funded and supported the Tamil terrorists and used them to terrorize Sri Lanka. Perhaps India should bring in a separate resolution as suggested by Mr. Karunanidhi and co-sponsored by the so called international community who were party to these Indian crimes in Sri Lanka. If the FACTS are documented correctly perhaps Sri Lanka will support it too – then it could be passed unanimously!

Yours truly,

Ira de Silva
London,  Canada

Navi Pillay is disqualified to be Head of UNHRC

March 5th, 2014

Shenali D Waduge SRI LANKA

When public sentiments against international public officials are voiced internationally there is an urgent need to investigate why the world public should openly find an international public official unsuitable. Thus, the UN Secretary General is duty bound to listen and in the least hold an impartial inquiry to ascertain the grounds on which people in different parts of the world are vocalizing their dissatisfaction with Navi Pillay, the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Countries too need to pay heed to calls of the public and place an official No Confidence Motion against her. Navi Pillay’s bias against Libya, Rwanda, Syria and Sri Lanka are highlighted below.

Navi Pillay bias against Libya

·         Invoking R2P on Libya overriding principles of national sovereignty and international law.

·         Helping demonize Gaddafi and son Saif at the UN

·         Accused using NGO Bouchuiguir’s lies to suspend Libya from UNHRC and referring Libya to Security Council.

·         Using UNHRC to call for an international inquiry into violence against civilians in Libya. Her call for an international inquiry led the ICC to indict Gaddafi and son for alleged human rights violations and the Western media did the rest to portray that Libya had failed its citizens giving reason enough for the West and NATO to intervene. The plan was set in place to oust Gaddafi and replace the Libyan Government was the NTC (National Transition Council), comprised of Western stooges that had been arranged by the UNHRC and 70 NGOs on February 25, 2011 initiated by UN Watch and National Endowment for Democracy (NED). There was no evidence of Libya committing crimes against its civilians though.

·         In support of above, she temporarily suspended Libya’s membership at the UNHRC before the meeting to deny Libya the chance to respond to the charges. Navi Pillay was chairing this meeting. Why would the Head of the UNHRC not allow Libya to respond to charges, would an impartial head function as she did?

·         Navi Pillay went on to at this same meeting call for the international community to ‘act without delay’ to protect the Libyan civilians from serious human rights violations. She went on to forward her report to the UN Security Council after formally suspending Libya from the UNHRC. Libya was prevented from appointing a new ambassador to the UN after 2 of its representatives defected to the Opposition and were given special passes to deliver ‘anti-Gaddafi’ remarks. When Libya appointed Rev. Miguel D’Escoto Brockman (former Nicaraguan Foreign Minister) as its new Permanent Representative, his attendance was blocked by Susan Rice, former US Ambassador to the UN using excuse that he was on a tourist visa and not diplomatic visa. Brockman criticized UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon for betraying the UN Charter calling the UN ‘a lethal weapon of the Empire’.

·         In what was a remaking of the Kuwaiti incubator babies lies that led to Gulf War 1, WMD the lie for Gulf War 2, excuse for Libya’s invasion was the mass rapes using Viagra by Gaddafi troops. Like the previous cases these were all fabrications with no evidence but the lie was sufficient for the US to carry out a scathing international campaign which led to the ICC Chief Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo (who has indicted 29 Africans) issuing an indictment against Gaddafi and son and accusing them of war criminals. Incidentally, all of ICC’s indictments under Ocampo not surprisingly were Africans and Pillay was a judge alongside Ocampo. All Africans who did not align to US policy goals ended up indicted. US citizens however are immune from ICC prosecution which makes international law and justice laughable.

·         She is accused of quoting civilian casualty figures without verifying truth – February 22, the UN Human Rights Chief Navi Pillay claimed that two hundred and fifty people had been killed in Libya….going on to say widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population” which may amount to crimes against humanity.” – these were all lies prepared for the intervention by US and NATO.

Navi Pillay bias against Rwanda

·         Pillay is accused of establishing her international credentials as a servant of the US empire following a US-sponsored proxy war in Rwanda.

·         Pillay was President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

·         Opposition was made against her appearance by lawyer, Justry Patrice Lumumba Nyaberi in view of her bias.

·         She is accused of covering up US culpability in Rwanda – Stephen Rapp prosecutor at ICTR concealed US culpability in Rwanda

·         Rwanda’s civil war and “ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objective.” (Michel Chossudovsky)

Navi Pillay bias against Syria

·         Abusing official position of UNHRC Head

·         Regime change exercise in Syria started in early 2011 funded through ‘Friends of Syria” (initiated by Canada) conference on 1 April 2012 attended by Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird and represented by 70 countries. US committed to provide ‘communications equipment’, Saudi and Qatar pledged large sums of money, Canada committed to provide $8.5m

·         18 Feb 2013, repeating calls for Syrian President Assad to be referred to the ICC. Is Assad who is repelling mercenaries attacking Syria wrong or the mercenaries funded and trained by the West?

·         Calling for military intervention in Syria (under the disguise of a humanitarian intervention) ignoring the ground realities of rebels following orders by the West

·         Seeking an arrest warrant against Assad to officially delegitimize his Government and to turn Assad into an international fugitive.

·         Referring to foreign compiled bogus-films to accuse Syria of crimes against humanity.

·         Completely ignoring US/Allies call to send mercenaries to oust President Assad. Did she forget the Nuremberg Principles, the London Charter of 1945, and Article 1 of the UN Charter that regime change within a sovereign country was a war crime? Did Pillay have to be told that to threaten regime change in a sovereign country was a violation of Article 2 of the UN Charter. Did she not look at the video footage filmed by the western-backed mercenaries themselves taking part in extralegal assassinations, execution of military prisoners, destruction of public places and infrastructure? As head of Human Rights should she have not done something when she can look at western created films and declare people and nations war criminals!!!

·         Urging UN Security Council to refer widespread human rights abuses in Syria to the ICC. Navi Pillay’s involvement with West’s & Gulf States Syrian agenda started in August 2011. Repeating this call in December 2011 and several times in 2012 and she continued to do so in 2013. In a CNN Interview with Hala Gorani she complained that Russia and China were using vetoes to oppose resolutions targeting Syria.

·         Brief to UN General Assembly on 13 February 2012 she declared that ‘the failure of the Security Council to agree on firm collective action appears to have emboldened the Syrian Government to launch an all-out assault in an effort to crush dissent with overwhelming force”. She then called for the matter to be referred to the ICC.

·         Navi Pillay quotes casualty figures supplied by foreign-backed Syrian opposition – another example of bias.

·         Syria’s delegation at the UNHRC My country’s delegation inspected the Commissioner’s report and wants to express their deep denunciation and regret at the obvious bias which Pillay practices in her dealing with the events in Syria’. (Faisal Al-Hamwi)

·         Accused of ignoring human rights violations of Al Qaeda and Al-Nusra groups and takfiris arriving from 40 states facilitated by Qatar and Turkey.

·         Accused of not condemning Qatar or Turkey a serious drawback to credibility of UNHRC and its head. Qatar is said to have spent $3billion on war in Syria.

·         Accused of ignoring Syria’s states right to protect its people

·         Accused of presenting an unprecedented exaggeration of situation in city of Al-Qseir – predicting massacres were going to happen 20 days before events started.

·         Accused of hiring an American agency in taking eyewitness accounts on Syria resulting in biased one-sided versions.

·         Accused of continuously referring Syria to the ICC which was not part of her mandate.

Quotes from Syrian delegation: If the High Commissioner’s office isn’t qualified to give documented data, then it’s better for it to remain silent,”

Quotes from Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates: It is really strange that she used the UN human and financial resources against Syria, based on lies and calls outside her jurisdiction,”

”The Commissioner has rejected to consider the acts of terrorist groups as crimes against humanity, although all standards of identifying crimes against humanity apply to them, and chose instead to level this accusation at the state which is doing its duty in protecting its own people,”

Navi Pillay bias against Sri Lanka

·         Navi Pillay’s Tamil ethnic origins are a direct conflict of interest in functioning as a mediator in Sri Lanka’s conflict. Nemo iudex in causa sua (or nemo iudex in sua causa) means no one should be judge in their own cause. This is a principle of natural justice that no person should judge a case in which they have an interest. Justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done. That cannot happen when there is a suspicion of improper interference in the course of justice. Judicial disqualification or recusal warrants abstaining from participating in an official action if there is a conflict of interest. Navi Pillay’s emotional, genetic and ethnic ties being a Tamil with roots to Tamil Nadu disqualifies her from functioning in a neutral, impartial, unbiased and emotionally detached manner. This directly links to UN ethics guidelines at organizational and personal level. We then question why she has not voluntarily withdrawn using law of recuse a requirement under continental civil law and by the Rome Statute.

·         Her neutrality is questioned why she kept using data supplied by the LTTE news agencies to question a legitimate government and continues to quote from LTTE front organizations as sources for her allegations against the Sri Lankan state.

·         Navi Pillay’s Indian Tamil community in South Africa was said to be aligned with LTTE, funding LTTE and secretly operating military camps to train LTTE – these camps were dismantled by President Mandela after consultations with former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadiragamar.

·         She can listen with empathy to spouses of dead LTTE leaders but she has no time to travel to other parts of Sri Lanka where LTTE struck terror for 30 years.

·         Within 4 years spending $3billion when Sri Lanka has

§  rescued from LTTE and resettled 295,873 Tamil IDPs

§  Rehabilitated and reintegrated 11800 former LTTE cadres including 594 child soldiers given a Presidential Pardon

§  Demined virtually all habitable areas

§  Set up massive infrastructure that sees new roads, buildings etc on what grounds does Pillay have to say she is still dissatisfied when none of the recent military interventions have done nothing near Sri Lanka’s achievement after over 10 years of occupation?

·         Accusation that Navi Pillay’s call for an ‘international investigation into war crimes in Sri Lanka’ are to satisfy the 3 prime movers (US,UK and India)

·         Accusation that Pillay has totally ignored over 30 years of war crimes including that of Indian War crimes by Indian Peace Keepers in Sri Lanka and no reference has ever been made by her

·         Accusation of UNHRC & UN being used as an open forum by LTTE fronts lobbying to force UN/foreign politicians to bring charges against the Sri Lankan State and the reluctance to even investigate them.

·         Accusation of her being a peace maker or trouble maker in demanding that the GOSL charge the over 11,000 rehabilitated former LTTE cadres who have integrated into society and starting a new life.

·         Accusation of attempting to polarize communities by bringing up isolated cases of religious issues while totally ignoring the over 700 attacks of mosques in the UK and attempting to link rapes in the North with military presence in order to use that as a ground to demand the removal of the military, another imperial outsourced agenda item.

·         Accusation of procedural bias by circulating her own incriminating report while refusing to attach Sri Lanka’s response giving Sri Lanka’s

·         Accusation of making statements without substantiate evidence in accusing the GOSL as being ‘authoritarian’.

·         The number of instances that she has issued derogatory statements against Sri Lanka from her office without any evidence or quoting from LTTE sources are many and can be listed separately were an investigation to be launched.

Why does Navi Pillay

·         Not investigate the military interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Yugoslavia and the suffering of these people as a result of US/NATO bombing?

·         Not investigate the allegations of human rights abuses taking place in these occupied countries?

·         Not investigate the devastation of land/property/infrastructure and people by US/NATO forces?

·         Not investigate the Human Rights violations of over 26million refugees living in sub-standard UN-run refugee camps where 12million of these refugees have been living for over 10 years. Why does she not take up the cause of these 12million refugees?

·         Not investigate the violation of using international mercenaries to destabilize countries and affect regime change?

·         Not investigate and take action against West for using banned chemicals like DU, white phosphorus?

·         Not investigate the funding/training of locals in countries targeted for regime change

·         Not investigate NGOs and other religious institutes that are foot soldiers for Western regime change agendas – who while spreading their faith through unethical conversions are building the foundations to oust national leaders and place puppets instead?

·         Not investigate terrorists disguised and functioning under charities and NGOs and using tax-free status to transfer money and arms to terrorists in a transnational exercise which foreign governments complicit and involving money-laundering elements too.

Navi Pillay needs to be investigated. Her credibility is wearing thin. She has shown that she is nothing but an imperial tool, a modern version of the Indian sepoy ever ready to use the international position given to her to serve the white masters. If the allegations are baseless, they can only be proven if the UN were to carry out an impartial investigation. That numerous countries have openly through their officials conveyed their government’s position of Navi Pillay’s bias should have warranted the UN Secretary General to hold an investigation into these allegations given that he and Pillay are ever ready to make allegations against others.

A No Confidence Motion needs to be signed and submitted to the UN if it does not hold an internal inquiry. Public Officials holding important portfolios such as that of Human Rights cannot be violating the very rights they are supposed to protect.


March 5th, 2014


 Dear Senator

 I refer to your speech to the Australian Parliament on Human Rights Abuses in Sri Lanka on 12 February 2014. The purpose of this speech was to request Australian Parliament’s support for the US sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka, which is expected to be tabled at the March 2014 UNHCR meeting. The resolution calls for a full independent inquiry into war crimes in Sri Lanka. As evidence for alleged allegations of war crimes in Sri Lanka you tabled the Public Interest Advocacy Centre’s (PIAC) report Island Impunity? Investigation into international crimes in the final stages of the Sri Lankan civil war”

 First and foremost I would like to draw your attention to your expressed ‘love’ for Sri Lanka. You said you first visited Sri Lanka in 1982 and you were ‘taken by friendliness of the people, rich culture, the fabulous food and wonderful environment’. Your second visit was in 2012 after the war and you were horrified because of the elected dictatorship” of the Rajapaksa family.

 As a naturalized Australian citizen of Sri Lankan origin, I grappled hard to comprehend your assertions. In 1982 the country was at the brink of a terrorist attack. You couldn’t have been happy as Sri Lankans across the country were shocked and alarmed at the terrorist attacks in the North, in particular on students and civilians. In 2012, after the defeat of terrorism there was peace and freedom; over 300,000 Tamil civilians who were lined up by the terrorists as a human shield during the war were rescued; child soldiers were saved from the terrorist carnage; people were happy and free to get on with their lives without the fear of terrorist attacks, suicide bombings etc. I am puzzled as to how you were unhappy when every one else (close to 20 million people) except the LTTE backers were happy about the liberation.

 You also say that your unhappiness was due to the elected dictatorship” of President Rajapaksa. You informed that 29 members of Rajapaksa extended family currently hold senior government positions; his brothers as government ministers control 45% of the budget, his son is in the navy and so on. I am amazed as to how an experienced senator like you can come up with such lame arguments. Firstly what is an elected dictatorship?” Yes President Rajapaksa was elected by nearly 65%-70% of the people who voted, on two occasions. This was because people cherished (and still do), the new found Freedom” after 30 years of vicious terrorism. Yes Rajapaksa brothers are in Parliament and one brother is the Speaker. I am at a loss to see any logic to your argument. Where does it say that the siblings of a President cannot contest elections and be appointed as Ministers?

 I also wonder whether you were aware that the PIAC report, you tabled as evidence, was full of hearsay and gossip. None of the allegations were tested and proved. You also make other ludicrous and inflammatory statements such as; there is no longer a capacity for free elections”; … peace is apparent, it is a façade, because conflict goes on”; there is alienation of intellectuals throughout the country”, People disappear in white vans and they are tortured’, and so on.

 My dear Senator, I wonder whether you have heard of the fact that foreign observers were monitoring Sri Lankan elections. Have you ever visited the North in recent times and seen the development not only in infrastructure but also in the livelihood of Tamil civilians, or have you ever witnessed people being kidnapped in white vans and tortured? If you had, have you raised your concerns with the Sri Lankan authorities with specific details as to Who, When, Where, What and How of the events that had allegedly taken place, so that there can be a so called ‘credible’ investigation?

 Under these circumstances your assertions can only lead me to believe that either you were misinformed or you have an anti Sri Lankan Agenda. I do not think you have any regard for the welfare of Sri Lankans except for the terrorists. So please do not patronise my country.

 Also, under parliamentary privilege you are able to make your own assertions without being contested. As you are aware these privileges come with the responsibility of presenting proven and confirmed facts, and not indulge in baseless allegations. I am sure you are well aware of the carnage created by the US in invading Iraq under false pretentions and the recent massacres in the Middle East with the support of the US for the rebels in the Middle East. I only hope you and your Party would not indulge in bringing about such carnage in Sri Lanka.

 I would also like to add that your attention can be directed to a large number of dreadful crimes and human rights violations, if you are really interested in making this world a better place to live. Brutal rapes of women that occur daily in places like India and Africa; the molestation of children; languishing refugees in UN refuge centres; absolute poverty in African countries as well as in the UN supported war zones are a few critical issues where your action would be most welcome.

 Kind regards

Janaki Chandraratna




Belligerent Babble on Bible and the Earth’s tilt

March 5th, 2014

By Shelton A. Gunaratne

 My hometown newspaper, The Forum of Fargo-Moohead, carried an unusual editorial (on Feb. 18, 2014) appreciating the change of seasons wrought by the Earth’s axial tilt of 23.4 degrees. Wisely, the editorial did not attribute this natural phenomenon to a creator God thereby leaving the readers to infer whatever they wished.
However, Christian propagandists in the area could not resist their temptation to disrupt the editorial’s neutrality by injecting a mischievous religious slant to the Earth’s tilt.
Ken Koehler, a religious educator in the area,  reacted to the editorial with a sermon titled “Knowledge of  Earth’s axial tilt set down in the Bible  by Creator” (The Forum, March 3,  20l4,  p. A9).
I immediately responded with the following letter to the editor (and am waiting to see whether the free press of America would accommodate my Buddhist point of view  as well):
“I resent and condemn the feeling of distress you inflicted  on thousands of your non-Christian  readers by publishing  a letter by Ken Koehler, a Christian propagandist, who apparently lives under the delusion of the Aristotelian  geocentric conception of the universe. Koehler should become aware of the astrophysicists’  contemporary view of the cosmos.
 “The modern view is that the universe comprises about 100 billion galaxies, each with billions of stars, great clouds of gas and dust, and perhaps scads of planets and moons and other little bits of cosmic flotsam. The stars produce an abundance of energy, from radio waves to X-rays, which streak across the universe at the speed of light.

“Where does the Bible refer to this view of the cosmos? Copernicus was  deemed a heretic for deviating from the orthodox theological view, which Koehler seems to back up by quoting from the Bible.

“The Forum editorial wisely refrained from connecting the Earth’s tilt to the omniscient, omnipresent Almighty God, who created all beings the way they turned out to be (the likes of  Winnie the Pooh, Tigger, Eeyore and the Rabbit) despite his foreknowledge of the mighty pitfalls of the endless greed he permitted man to possess by giving every being the illusion of a permanent soul.

“The absolute truth is sunyata—that nothing exists in the universe except a vast tangle of energy.  The conventional truth is that nothing in the universe is permanent, including the Earth’s tilt.”


[Gunaratne, professor of mass communications emeritus, lives in Moorhead, Minn., USA)

US led UNHRC Resolution on Lanka disappointing -Karuna

March 5th, 2014

Mahinda Gunasekera

By E-mail                                                                                                                    84 Tambrook Drive
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M1W 3L9
March 5, 2014

The Editor
Essel Studio,
FC-19, Sector 16-A,
Noida – 201301, India

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: ‘US led UNHRC Resolution on Lanka disappointing -Karuna’ – March 5, 2014

I refer to the above captioned news report published in your edition of March 5, 2014, and wish to
comment as follows:

The DMK Party Chief, Mr. M. Karunanidhi is either under a misapprehension or is deliberately trying
to mislead Indian leaders in taking extreme steps at the UNHRC against Sri Lanka, by claimimg that
the military action taken against the Tamil Tiger terrorists was an act of genocide against a minority.
The Tamil Tigers thrust a war on the Sri Lankan authorities by cutting off drinking and irrigation water
to 30,000 farming families living downstream from Mahavil Oya (Mavilaru) in July 2006. They also
forced the Tamil civilians of the Vanni region to move with the retreating LTTE to be exploited for
their labour, conscripted to replace fallen cadre and serve as a human shield. They did not permit the
civilians to leave their control in spite of Sri Lanka unilaterally arranging for two 48 hour ceasefires
to enable them to cross over to safety, and even opened fire on those who attempted to leave. The
LTTE were offered two opportunities to lay down their weapons and surrender, but they opted to
fight to the very end in the hope of an intervention by western forces who would spring them out
and obtain asylum elsewhere to resume hostilities.

The Sri Lankan forces not only defeated the terror forces of the LTTE, but also rescued 295,873
Tamil civilians being used as a human shield. Former LTTE cadres numbering 11,800 including 594
child soldiers were rehabilitated and released to society with new life skills.The Tamil IDPs were well
cared for in transit camps, and resettled in their former villages with livelihood assistance after
necessary infrastructure costing over $3 billion had been carried out within just four years.  These
Tamil IDPs fled towards the Sri Lankan forces in the midst of gun fire, artillery shells and suicide
bombers being directed against them by the LTTE.  They did not rush towards a genocidal army but
came over voluntarily to escape from LTTE terror and seek refuge and solace for themselves.

Perhaps Mr. Karunanidhi is not aware that only 700,000 Tamils live in the predominantly Tamil north
whilst the rest numbering 2.5 million live in the rest of the country in mixed ethnic surroundings where
they enjoy equal rights and democratic freedoms.  Sri Lanka has adopted a process of healing and
reconciliation based on restorative justice instead of retributive justice as outlined in her own Lessons
Learnt and Reconciliation Commission’s report.  An Action Plan with time lines has been set up to
implement the home grown package of solutions, with much headway being achieved in the short
period after the end of the armed conflict.  Any external probe into the internal affairs of Sri Lanka
will only hinder the prevailing peace and ongoing reconciliation.  Sri Lanka does not want to dig up
the role of the DMK in providing funds, sanctuary and other material help to the Indian trained Tamil
militants including the LTTE terrorists used for destabilizing her tiny neighbour Sri Lanka.  Even the
war crimes and HR violations committed by the IPKF against Sri Lanka Tamils from 1987 to 1990 needs
to be put on the back stage for now. Sri Lanka does not intend to scratch these old wounds and bring
up animosities to the surface, but to forge ahead with the new found peace to build a united Sri Lanka.

Yours sincerely,

Mahinda Gunasekera

Minister Peiris rejects High Commissioner’s Report says those those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process”

March 5th, 2014

 Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka Geneva

Minister of External Affairs and Leader of the Sri Lanka delegation Prof. G.L. Peiris, delivering the National Statement at the High Level Segment of the 25th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva today (5 March 2014), rejected the Report of the High Commissioner in its entirety, saying it was fundamentally flawed and disregarded the substantial progress made by the Government during the five years which have elapsed since the end of the thirty year conflict against terrorism. He said it also pays scant regard to the complexities and local nuances of a sensitive reconciliation process, while eroding confidence of the people of Sri Lanka by the constant changing of unjustifiable demands. Moreover, they persist in an attitude which is clearly disproportionate to the circumstances and inconsistent with the treatment of comparable situations. It is much to be regretted that the High Commissioner’s Report and those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process by bringing about a polarisation of the Sri Lankan society.

The Minister said the few references made in the Council welcoming the High Commissioner’s Report on Sri Lanka, including at the highest level of the UN are regrettable, particularly considering that it is based on questionable and baseless material including what has been processed outside the UN framework.  He noted that the Panel of Experts Report which was the culmination of a private consultation that the Secretary General sought for his own advice, and is not the product of any intergovernmental process, has been extensively resorted to by the High Commissioner in her Report to the Council, in a bid to legitimize it within the UN framework despite the lack of mandate in this regard. However, if the initiative taken on Sri Lanka at this juncture by the OHCHR is to be the basis on which the country is to be judged, it will clearly be a travesty of justice.

In this context, the Minister said Sri Lanka greatly valued the sentiments expressed in the Council by countries who have similar experiences with regard to reconciliation, that Sri Lanka be provided with the requisite time and space to address their own process domestically in a comprehensive manner as opposed to those who continue to pay disproportionate attention to Sri Lanka, based on agendas driven by political motives.

(Text of the full statement of the Minister to the 25 HRC has already been circulated.)

Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka



05 March, 2014

Statement by Hon. Prof. G.L. Peiris at the High Level Segment of the 25th Session of the Human Rights Council

March 5th, 2014

Minister of External Affairs & Leader of the Sri Lanka Delegation

Mr. President,

Madam High Commissioner,


Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to deliver this statement on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka.  May I at the outset congratulate you Mr. President, as well as Members of the Bureau on your election as office bearers of this Council. I pledge my delegation’s support to you at all times in the discharge of your office. Sri Lanka also reiterates its continued support to the High Commissioner in the discharge of her mandate as contained in GA Resolution 48/141, to the OHCHR, and to the work of this Council. 
Mr. President,

It is imperative that the Human Rights Council remains a credible and independent arbiter in dealing with global human rights situations. All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated, and must be treated in a fair and equitable manner, without the privileging of one set of rights over another. It is for these reasons, that economic, social and cultural rights which are at the core of sustainable development need to gain the same level of emphasis and legitimacy as civil and political rights. As we celebrate the 28th anniversary of the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of the Declaration on the Right to Development, there needs to be a more robust approach to promote effective international cooperation with regard to the right to development and the elimination of obstacles to its enjoyment.

Sri Lanka shares the concern of the High Commissioner as well as States on the challenges faced by her Office on account of resource constraints. At the same time, we remain deeply concerned that the lack of financial independence of the OHCHR leads to the erosion of independence in its overall functioning. For example, the disproportionate attention being paid to country-specific action in the Council which selectively targets some countries, while situations, human rights violations and restrictive practices in other parts of the world that warrant more urgent and immediate attention and action remain conveniently ignored, is a matter of serious concern. The stark reality is that the continuation and proliferation of the practice of the selective adoption of country-specific resolutions in the Council is a tool that exploits human rights for political purposes. Regrettably, a similar pattern is evident in the case of continued action on Sri Lanka in this Council. We reiterate that such politicized action is contrary to the high purposes and principles of the Council and must be arrested. We believe that additional budgetary allocations from regular funding would lessen the OHCHR’s dependence on voluntary contributions and earmarked funding and thus would allow it to function in an independent manner.

 Mr. President, notwithstanding Sri Lanka’s non-recognition of the country-specific action taken against our country at the behest of a few countries in this Council, without basis, and without the consent of the country concerned, Sri Lanka has continued its proactive engagement with the UN, this Council and the OHCHR, in a spirit of transparency, cooperation and dialogue. My delegation has consistently shared with this body continued progress in the reconciliation process, regrettably in a politicised environment due to vested interests of a few. There has been significant progress in the reconciliation process over the past 12 months and approximately 19 months since the National Plan of Action (NPoA) to implement the domestic reconciliation mechanism, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), became operational.
Mr. President, in July 2012, the Government accepted 91 recommendations of the LLRC for implementation within the framework of the NPoA. In July 2013, an additional 53 recommendations were accepted by the Government, making the total number of LLRC recommendations under implementation 144, out of the 285 Paragraphs  contained in Chapter 9 of the LLRC Report titled ‘Summary of the Principal Observations and Recommendations’, the latter comprising the sum total of observations and recommendations of the LLRC. 

The implementation of the LLRC recommendations clustered by the Government under five themes – {(IHL issues (07 recommendations), Human Rights (54 recommendations), Land Return & Resettlement (24 recommendations), Restitution/Compensatory relief (09 recommendations), Reconciliation (50 recommendations)} — is overseen by an Inter-Ministerial Task Force under the supervision of the Secretary to the President. The implementation of the LLRC NPoA is a dynamic process which continues to evolve over time to culminate in the accomplishment of the recommendations.  This process is envisaged to incorporate additional measures and modifications of the activities as and when required to fulfill the respective recommendations.

When these achievements are juxtaposed with the nearly 30 long years of terrorist conflict, any objective observer would agree Sri Lanka’s achievements would indeed match, if not surpass those of any country emerging from similar conditions. This is no mean feat for a developing country. 

Allow me to take this opportunity to elucidate the Council on the post-conflict developments in the country.

The Commission on Disappearances was appointed on 12 August 2013 for a term of six months to conduct inquiries and investigations as necessary, and to submit a report containing its findings and recommendations. The Commission requested an extension to its mandate and has been granted a further six months until 12 August 2014 in order to undertake a comprehensive inquiry and complete its work. 

 The hearings of the Commission commenced in January 2014, following two extensions granted to the public to make submissions (i.e., deadline of 31 October 2013 was extended to 30 November.2013 and 31 December2013, respectively). The extensions were granted, both to accommodate complaints received, and in response to (a) requests made by persons in the North and East. 

Since the establishment of the Commission on Disappearances on August 12, 2013, it has issued Public Notices on three occasions (i.e., October, November and December 2013) in all three languages and in all major newspapers calling on relatives of missing persons to submit their complaints to the Commission. The final Public Notice for receiving complaints lapsed on December 31, 2013. However, the Commission continues to receive complaints, all of which are acknowledged, and will be investigated.  

As per information obtained from the Commission, nearly 16,000 complaints have been received thus far. The Commission is scheduled to conduct public sittings in the Batticaloa District in the Eastern Province later in March 2014, covering 56 Grama Niladhari Divisions (Village level Administrative Units) in the district. Previously, the Commission conducted public sittings and heard oral evidence in the Kilinochchi District in the Northern Province in January 2014, and in Jaffna District in February 2014. All Commission hearings are open to public and they have always been facilitated full access to the hearings.

The Commission conducts public sittings on a regular basis in the Northern and Eastern provinces in order to hear evidence from relatives of missing persons. Once the Commission has sufficient material, it will submit a report to the Government.

It must be pointed out that on behalf of the Commission, the Government sought the assistance of countries host to Sri Lankan asylum seekers for their details in order to process the information on alleged disappearances.  However, we have been informed by these countries that for reasons of privacy they are unable to accede to the request. Undoubtedly this position hampers the progress of the work by the Commission in reaching finality in regard to its investigations. With regard to the General Allegation letter dated 14th February 2014 by the Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on the conduct and implementation of this Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged abductions or disappearances, the Government has provided a detailed response on 1st March 2014, substantively refuting all unsubstantiated allegations contained therein.  We have requested that our response be circulated as a UN document of this Council session, given its relevance and importance.

The ICRC which has been working in Sri Lanka since the 1990s, continues to be engaged in the country’s post-conflict phase on residual issues of relevance. The ICRC continues its engagement with Sri Lanka on matters relating to alleged disappearances and missing persons, including work with regard to enumeration of disappearances, support to people with disabilities and female-headed households, and issues related to detention. The collaboration with the ICRC on the issue of disappearances includes studying practical methodologies adopted by other countries in dealing with cases of alleged disappearances.  Issues pertaining to families of persons identified as missing” or disappeared” are being addressed through a mechanism to implement the findings of a Family Needs Assessment” conducted by the ICRC in 2013.

Sri Lanka also benefits from technical assistance from the ICRC in the said areas. The ICRC has met on two occasions with the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances where, inter alia, their experience in comparable situations in other countries has been shared.  The Government’s cooperation with the ICRC is also in fulfillment of the LLRC’s recommendations 9.48, 9.50that the law enforcement authorities, in cooperation with relevant agencies, especially the ICRC, to trace the whereabouts of missing persons and ensure reunification with their families”. 

Processing of data of the Island-wide Census to gather information on deaths/injuries to persons and property damages that have occurred from 1982 to date as a direct or indirect result of the internal conflicts is in progress. The Preliminary Report, based on the enumerator summaries, is anticipated to be released in a few weeks’ time. An additional budgetary allocation of Rs 150 million was granted in January 2014 to the Department of Census and Statistics to complete the Census.

Non-Summary Inquiry commenced with regard to the Five Students of Trincomalee case on 9 September 2013. As at present, the evidence of 14 witnesses is concluded.  The witnesses include members of the Police, Army, Navy and a relative of one of the deceased. Affidavits of 07 official witnesses have been tendered as evidence. Summons have been issued on 14 witnesses to appear on the next date of inquiry on 06 March 2014. In addition, as 07 persons listed as witnesses for the prosecution are at present living overseas, steps have been taken to locate their present whereabouts to serve summons. With regard to the Muttur (ACF) case, following instructions by the Attorney-General, action has been taken to identify and record statements of army commandos and civil society members.  A further statement had been recorded from a Member of the Local Council and an employee of the council. The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has obtained copies of photographs and a report prepared by the Additional Director of the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA) to clarify the issue of the number of bodies found at the crime scene.  In addition, 12 employees of ACF have been interviewed and their statements recorded. Further investigations are being conducted under the guidance of the Attorney General.

The First Part of the Army Court of Inquiry (COI), investigating allegations on civilian casualties concluded in February 2013. The inquiry concluded that instances of shelling referred to in the LLRC Report were not caused by the Sri Lanka Army and that civilian casualties may have occurred due to unlawful acts by the LTTE. These acts include targeting civilians fleeing to the safety of Army-held areas and likely routes of escape, dropping of artillery rounds fired by ill-trained LTTE gunners on to civilian concentrations. The COI has indicated that further evidence, if presented, will be examined. 

 The Court of Inquiry appointed by the Army is now addressing the second part of their mandate, comprising the Channel 4 allegations, which commenced in March 2013. The identification of potential witnesses is currently in progress and, once identified, they would be formally called as witnesses. It may be noted that the LLRC, in its Observations/Recommendations on the Channel 4 video, inter alia expressed its regret at “the fact that the broadcaster did not respond positively to the request made by the Commission to provide more comprehensive information”, and noted that “greater cooperation by the organisation that provided to the television stations these video images and by the producers/broadcasters that aired this footage is essential to establish the facts of the case”.

Sri Lanka has initiated action to prepare legislation with regard to Witness and Victim Protection. Consequent to extensive consultation in this regard, including examination by the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Legislation and action being taken thereon by the Legal Draftsman, finalization of legislation is in progress. The need for legislation for the criminalization of disappearances is being examined by a Committee appointed by the Ministry of Justice, in consultation with the Attorney General.  

A total area of 1,980 sqkm, which is 96 % of the areas identified for demining have been cleared as at the end of December 2013. 70 % of the demining was carried out by the Sri Lanka Army.

This paved the way for the expeditious resettlement of internally displaced persons. 297,000 Internally Displaced Persons who were housed at Menik Farm Welfare Village immediately after the conflict in 2009 have now been fully resettled and this facility was closed in September 2012. Action is being taken to expedite resettlement of the remaining 7,094 IDP families in the North and the East. Of this, 5,585 are currently staying with host families. The Government is also working towards finding durable solutions to resettle approximately 75,000 Muslim who were forcibly evicted from the Northern Province by the LTTE in an ethnic cleansing exercise, over 20 years ago. Further, a study is underway with the collaboration of the UNHCR to establish whether there are any hitherto unreported displaced persons and the report is expected by end March 2014.

As recommended by the LLRC, the Government has mobilized funding for restitution and the provision of compensatory relief for those affected by the conflict. SLRs. 392 million has been provided for the payment of compensation from 2010 to 2012, and SLRs. 204 million in 2013. The 2014 budget has allocated SLRs. 475 million to continue the implementation of this recommendation. While the bulk of funding for these activities was provided by the Government, the support of international partners also needs to be acknowledged. Compensation schemes have also been implemented by the Rehabilitation Authority to provide relief for the next of kin affected by the death or injury of those involved with the LTTE. Such relief is also provided in cases of property damage due to the conflict, including religious places.

In line with the LLRC recommendations, persons with disabilities in conflict affected areas receive benefits from Government schemes providing housing and livelihood support. Under the Housing Assistance Programme for persons with disabilities”, 152 families in the North and 502 families in the East have been provided Rs 250,000 each to construct houses with accessibility facilities. A sum of Rs 76 million has been incurred by the Government for this purpose.

With regard to livelihood support, nearly 4,000 families in the North and East having a disabled member receive a monthly cash allowance under the Monthly Livelihood Assistance Programme”. Also, 209 persons in the Eastern Province and 539 disabled persons in the Northern Province have been assisted to set up self-employment ventures under the Self Employment Assistance Programme for persons with disabilities”. Fifty disabled youth from Kilinochchi have been selected for training in job-oriented vocational disciplines by the Social Services Department.   

Land is one of the most complex and sensitive residual issues of the conflict and continues to be addressed. In line with the LLRC recommendation, the Government is implementing the Land Commissioner General’s Special Land Circular which provides for the granting of legal ownership of land to those IDPs who have been resettled. In January 2014 alone, 3,623 land requests have been received in the Northern Province. Of this, 2,321 have been resolved, making a total of 24,389 resolutions of 147,504 land requests to date. In the Eastern Province, 490 land requests have been received in January (total 11,662 to date) and 83 have been resolved (total 1,260 to date).

The former High Security Zones (HSZ) have ceased to exist. Palaly cantonment is now the only area in which some security restrictions remain although civilians have unrestricted access to Palaly airport and KKS harbour. Similarly, former HSZ in the Eastern Province, located in the Sampoor area from 2007 has been reduced in extent by 65 per cent and declared a Licensed Zone under the Board of investment.

As at January 2014 the Government has released 19,322 acres of private land and 2,518 acres of State owned land in the Northern Province which were hitherto used by the military. In the East, the Government has released 689 acres of private land and 3,222 acres of State land. Therefore the total figure of lands released in the North and the East amounts to 20,011 acres of private land and 5,740 acres of State land.

The Terms of Reference for a Fourth Land Commission are under preparation. Amendment to the Prescription Ordinance will be presented in Parliament by April, 2014. Steps are being taken to Gazette the necessary Orders under the Special Mediation Boards Act, to establish relevant Boards in certain areas where the armed conflict prevailed, and address certain identified land disputes that have arisen in those areas. This amply demonstrates that allegations of ‘land grabbing’ taking place in the former conflict-affected areas are entirely unfounded.

Housing programmes to reconstruct and renovate houses have been implemented by the Government in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Some of these programme are being carried out with the assistance of bilateral partners.

 The Northern Province has recorded a Provincial GDP (PDGP) growth rate of 23.6 per cent in 2013 contributing 4.3 per cent to the National Economy up from 3.7 per cent in 2011 while the Eastern Province registered the second growth of 26.6 per cent in the PGDP with an increase in its GDP share to 6.9 in 2013 from 5.8 per cent in 2011.

Unemployment rates have declined significantly in the Northern and Eastern provinces in the post-conflict phase. This is illustrated by the fact that the unemployment rate in the Northern Province has declined from 6.1 per cent to 5.2 per cent, and in the Eastern provinces from 15.5 per cent to 4.9 per cent in the period 2005 – 2012. Food ratio is one of the principle indicators used to measure living standards of a population. Food ratios for Northern and Eastern provinces have declined from 59 per cent to 44.8 per cent and 57 per cent to 55 per cent respectively.

Under the Urban Development Programme (Pura Neguma), 84 per cent of total investment in the North and 77 per cent of total investment in the East were channelled to create access to rural roads.

The reconstructed railway line from Omanthai to Kilinochchi was commissioned and dedicated to the public of Sri Lanka on 14 September 2013. The second segment, Kilinochchi – Pallai, of approximately 30 kilometres, was added to the rail network yesterday.

The Chunnakam Grid substation was opened connecting the Jaffna peninsula with the national grid after a lapse of two decades. Over 63 Mw of power is to be transmitted to the Jaffna peninsula through the substation for which the Government has spent SLRs. 1,800 million.

The new Oluvil Port Development project in the East, constructed at a cost of Rs. 7,000 million, was opened in September 2013. 

A 10-year National Plan for a Trilingual Sri Lanka was launched in January 2012 for the implementation of the Trilingual Policy.  In line with this Plan, the Government has initiated a program to make public sector workers bilingual, with the ability to converse in both Sinhala and Tamil. Civil servants and Police officers have been recruited and trained to serve the public in the North and the East in the language of their choice. Special focus is being placed on enabling police personnel serving in the North to have a sound knowledge of Tamil. The Police Department has deployed 900 Tamil police officers and 1,500 Sinhala police officers fluent in the Tamil language in police stations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Preparations are also under way to recruit 150 Tamil speaking Women Police Officers in 2014 to augment all Units of the Women and Children Bureau at all Police Stations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.  In addition, Government officers are regularly encouraged, and participate in language competency training.

The National Department for Registration of Persons has taken measures to issue computerized bilingual identity cards in the two national languages, Sinhala and Tamil. While identity cards of minority communities are already being issued in two languages for their convenience, the new decision will be applicable to all identity cards, as a corrective measure and to ensure equity for all citizens.

There have been allegations on changing the demography of the Northern areas by resettling people other than Tamils. In the early 1980s, before the ethnic cleansing by the LTTE, over 75,000 Muslims and over 35,000 Sinhalese co-existed peacefully in the North of Sri Lanka. When the conflict escalated, almost all these civilians either left or were forcibly evicted by the LTTE. Today, 51 per cent of the population in Colombo city is non-Sinhalese which is testimony to the fact that the people of Sri Lanka can freely choose where they want to live, and there are no efforts to create mono-ethnic niches within the country. This is further substantiated by the fact that only 32 per cent of the Tamil population live in the North while the remainder live among other communities in the rest of the country.

Of the 12,288 former LTTE combatants that have surrendered or came under court order,  96.9 per cent have been rehabilitated and integrated into society as of 03 March 2014. Only 157 are currently undergoing rehabilitation and 85 remain under legal proceedings.

Following the termination of military operations against the LTTE in 2009, the Government has undertaken a gradual process of reduction of military presence in former conflict affected areas. It may be noted that the total strength of the military in the Northern Province has been reduced by approximately 30 per cent from 2009 to October 2013, a process which is continuing to take place. In addition, in the Eastern Province approximately 26 per cent reduction of troop presence has been undertaken.

There have been repeated attempts to draw a non-existent correlation between the presence of the military and vulnerability of women to sexual harassment and violence in the North. This position is not borne out by available statistics. It must be categorically stated that Sri Lanka has a zero tolerance policy on sexual harassment and abuse of women and children. The Government has taken concrete action in all reported cases where Sri Lankan security forces personnel have been involved and will continue to do so.

The military has no involvement in civilian administration. The civil administration system in the North and East is fully functional. The culmination of this process was the successful conclusion of Provincial Council elections in the North in September 2013 and the establishment of the Northern Provincial Council. However, it is regrettable that external entities think it fit to pressurize the Government with regard to that Councils staffing, and even on the appointment of the Governor, which is the prerogative of the Executive.  Such pressure on the conduct of governance are unacceptable and not in keeping with the conduct of international relations.

The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) was set up to arrive at a final political solution with participation by 21 political parties who are represented in Parliament. The terms of reference for the PSC were formulated jointly with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). It is unfortunate that the TNA persistently refuses to participate in this process. It should be recognized that this approach by the TNA is a hindrance to any settlement. However, despite the non-participation of the TNA, the PSC continues with its deliberations.

 All people living in Sri Lanka enjoy freedom of religion, which is a constitutionally guaranteed right. The Government of Sri Lanka remains committed to ensuring that this right is protected. This is demonstrated by the action taken to address reported incidents of disturbances in the recent past.

The four major religions have co-existed side by side in Sri Lanka for centuries. Regrettably, there is an effort to project the sporadic incidents of attacks aimed at religious places, as a sign of religious hatred and intolerance. It should be noted that these incidents have targeted places of worship of all four religions. The Government does not condone any of those activities. With regard to reported attacks, 16 relate to Buddhist, 41 to Christian/Catholic and 20 Muslim places of worship during the period from June 2009 to December 2013.  Judicial inquiries are in progress with regard to 62 per cent of the attacks, and 22 cases have been concluded. In all such instances where police complaints have been lodged, police have taken legal steps to produce suspects before Magistrates. Whenever credible information relating to incidents has been made available, the Government has taken appropriate action.

The recent incident in Hikkaduwa in southern Sri Lanka is a case in point. Police complaints were lodged regarding the incident which caused damage to buildings of the Assembly of God and Holy Calvary Sectors during a public protest. Police forthwith initiated legal proceedings and twenty one persons including Buddhist monks have surrendered responding to the Court Order. The case is scheduled to be called on 17 March 2014 for further hearings. 

Additionally, in keeping with Sri Lanka’s societal, cultural and historical norms, regular dialogue continues to take place at various levels to ensure interfaith harmony and understanding amongst its diverse populace.

Administration of justice, inclusive of independence of the judiciary is constitutionally enjoined, and any infringement of these entrenched rights is visited with sanctions. Judges hold office during good behavior, and proven misbehavior or incapacity triggers constitutionally entrenched disciplinary proceedings. Any procedure adopted in this regard has been in accordance with the Constitution and such action in compliance with constitutional provisions cannot be regarded as undermining the independence of the judiciary.

The Government of Sri Lanka is fully committed to the protection of human rights defenders. The wide range of interactions that the High Commissioner had with civil society during her visit, as well as the active engagement of civil society from Sri Lanka in successive Council sessions is testimony to the vibrant nature of Sri Lanka’s civil society and the freedoms they enjoy. 

Mr. President, during the period under review Sri Lanka has continued its proactive engagement with the Council, the OHCHR and the international community in a spirit of transparency, cooperation and dialogue.  The past year has also witnessed the visit of High Commissioner Navi Pillay to Sri Lanka on a week-long, comprehensive visit which included travel to the former theatre of conflict in the North and the East, as well as the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs Dr. Chaloka Beyani whose visit too included travel to the North.  Sri Lanka also hosted the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo last November where 54 of the states in this august gathering participated. These comprehensive visits and exposure enabled Sri Lanka to demonstrate first hand the very tangible progress on the ground with regard to reconciliation.

Sri Lanka has consistently interacted with the United Nations system and the wider international community in a spirit of goodwill and cooperation.  It is in this context that Sri Lanka remains committed to a positive engagement with the Council and its mechanisms, including special procedures.

Sri Lanka’s  Ambassador / Permanent Representative in Geneva has engaged in regular dialogue with special procedures mandate holders including, inter alia, the Special Rapporteur on Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-recurrence and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions. 
Sri Lanka has also conducted regular meetings with the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), including with the participation of senior representation from the Attorney General’s Department. Since January 2012, the Government has transmitted responses on 1,042 cases to the WGEID. Additionally, an Inter-Agency Task Force established comprising the Ministries of External Affairs, Defence and the Attorney General’s Department continues to respond to the Working Group and provide clarification on cases.  It is pertinent to note that 80 per cent of the caseload of the WGEID under consideration dates back over 20 years to the pre-1990 period.

 Similarly, Sri Lanka has proactively engaged with the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD). During the period from January 2012 to date, the Government has responded to 9 of the 11 communications transmitted by the Working Group with regard to issues of alleged detention. Additionally, Sri Lanka also responded by its communication dated 28 February 2014 to the Questionnaire transmitted to delegations by the Working Group on the ‘Right to anyone deprived of his or her liberty by arrest or detention’ inclusive of examples containing detailed information on cases applicable.

 From January 2013 to date, Sri Lanka has responded to 20 communications from special procedures (both country specific and general) excluding communications by the WGEID and the WGAD, the latter having been collated separately as indicated earlier.  From 2012 to date, Sri Lanka has responded to 71 per cent of the communications received from special procedures addressed to the Government on various issues with specific and detailed information, excluding communications from the WGEID and the WGAD.  The Government continues to endeavour to respond to all communications by special procedures in a spirit of cooperation, transparency and dialogue.

The request for visit by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances is under consideration as with other similar requests from special procedures, which will be processed as mutually convenient and taking into account national imperatives and initiatives. It is relevant to recall the continuation of the mandate of the Commission on Disappearances. This domestic mechanism needs to be given adequate time. As we have previously informed this august body, we will continue to schedule pending visits of special procedures mandate holders following the visit of the High Commissioner.  In line with this commitment, the Government has, as of now, extended three invitations to special procedures since August 2013 including to the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs, the Special Rapporteur on Education, and the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants.  The Special Rapporteur on Education has informed of his inability to undertake this visit this year.

In line with its treaty body commitments, Sri Lanka continues to engage and submit its periodic reports to the respective treaty bodies.  Sri Lanka’s 3rd and 4th Report to the Committee Against Torture came under consideration in November 2011.  Sri Lanka submitted its 5th report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in October 2012, and in September 2013, its response to the Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Currently, the Government’s 5th report under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is under preparation. The Government is also engaged in initial preparations to submit its reports in 2015 under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 

As previously committed at its UPR second cycle in November 2012, the Government agreed to implement recommendations of the LLRC in line with the LLRC National Plan of Action (NPoA), and also to make available financial and other resources to meet this objective. Additionally, Sri Lanka made 19 voluntary commitments in relation to the UPR, of which 12 have direct relevance to the reconciliation process and implementation of the recommendations of the LLRC. 

Sri Lanka remains open to consideration of technical cooperation from the OHCHR in some key areas in reconciliation, in line with the needs of the country, in the context of implementing the NPoA of the LLRC, as well as the accepted recommendations of Sri Lanka’s  UPR 2nd cycle. In keeping with HRC Resolution 5/1, offers of technical assistance need to be made in consultation with and with the concurrence of the receiving State. Sri Lanka has also undertaken commitments on technical cooperation under the UN Development Assistance Framework 2013-2017.

Further, to identify the specific needs of those who have returned or resettled but are still having specific needs linked to their displacement and to reconcile the discrepancies in relation to the number of remaining IDPs to be resettled in the country, action has already been initiated to conduct a Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) by OCHA in consultation with the Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security in the Northern Province. This issue was also referred to during the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs to Sri Lanka in December 2013.  Consequent to a series of meetings, formal approval for the Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) has been communicated to the UNOCHA. A letter of Agreement is being prepared between the Government and the UN Country Team to give effect to the JNA. UNOCHA has already appointed consultants to plan out and monitor the whole process.

A key UNDP supported program, Strengthening Enforcement of Law, Access to Justice and Social Integration (SELAJSI) which is a joint initiative of the Ministries of National Languages and Social Integration; Justice; Rehabilitation and Prison Reforms; and Child Development and Women’s Affairs was launched by the UN Assistant Secretary-General, Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific of the UNDP in February 2014. The programme aims at ensuring that gains in the justice sector are institutionalized, systemised and scaled-up.

Ministry of Justice is implementing a programme in collboration with UNICEF and relevant government stakeholders and civil societies to strengthen and enhance child protection by establishing special Child Friendly Children’s Courts.  

Additionally, several international organizations are engaged by the Government to provide assistance to war-affected persons through focal line Ministries.  Examples include World Bank collaboration with the Ministry of Social Services under Diri Saviya Project” to provide financial assistance to the disabled; UNICEF assistance to implement the concept of Social Care Centers in the Northern and the Eastern provinces; UNICEF assistance to the Ministry of Education to implement the Be Safe” awareness programme to protect children  from abuse in  schools in the Northern Province; UNICEF assistance  for vocational training in Mannar and Mullaitivu Training Centres; GIZ assistance to the Ministry of Education to create awareness on psycho-social care for Education Directors, Principals and Teachers in Northern and Eastern Provinces; GIZ assistance to set up vocational training centres in Northern province; Canadian Government assistance to the National Languages Project;  World University Services of Canada support to set up 03 Vocational Centres and 03 Recognition of Prior Learning Centres for re-settled people in Northern province; ICRC assistance to rehabilitated LTTE members under the ICRC livelihood assistance programme; INGO and NGO collaboration with the Ministry of Health to promote awareness on mental health and nutrition among women and children in conflict affected areas; and Government, UN agencies, INGOs, NGOs collaboration in constructing and renovating houses for returnees, etc.

Notwithstanding these achievements, judging by the persistent demands made on Sri Lanka, as well as the assertion that domestic mechanisms have failed, it is clear that there is no acknowledgement of this very tangible progress. 

Regrettably, as much as Sri Lanka has endeavoured to cooperate with the OHCHR, there have been a series of actions, in particular the introduction of country specific action on Sri Lanka in this Council, that have shown lack of sensitivity in dealing with delicate situations and exposed the unfair and biased manner in which issues pertaining to Sri Lanka have been addressed.

Detailing of two of the most recent examples suffice.

-       In September 2013, in contravention of HRC resolution 5/1, specifically Rule 14 (47) and Paragraph 117 which casts a duty on the OHCHR that acts as the Secretariat of the Council to prepare and circulate documents for consideration by the Council in a timely manner, the text of the Oral Update of the High Commissioner was made available to Sri Lanka for response as the state concerned, with less than 20 hours remaining for its consideration in the Council.

-       In February 2014, the non-adherance by the OHCHR to the request by Sri Lanka to publish the Comments by the State on the Report of the High Commissioner (A/HRC/25/23) as an Addendum to the Report in the current session in spite of existence of clear precedent in this regard and no rule to the contrary governing Addenda and submission of comments by the State on HC / SG Country Reports, is again in contravention of the Methods of Work of the Council which clearly state at Paragraph 110 of the IB package  that “The methods of work, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 60/251 should be transparent, impartial, equitable, fair, pragmatic; lead to clarity, predictability, and  inclusiveness. They may also be updated and adjusted over time.”
Mr. President, regrettably, these are examples of patent bias demonstrated by the OHCHR in addressing issues in relation to Sri Lanka. The OHCHR’s most recent act of placing the Comments of the Government of Sri Lanka on the Report A/HRC/25/23 under ‘Communications from Governments’, has seriously impeded the visibility and integrity of  between the Report and the Comments by the State. It not only reflects a lack of transparency, but also clearly denies Sri Lanka a level playing field to present its point of view. The unequal treatment meted out to Sri Lanka by the OHCHR in the above instance defeats  the very principles  upheld by the Council.  

The procedural concerns that Sri Lanka has raised with the President of the Council with regard to the above anomalies have wider relevance to member and observer states of the Council.  They also raise serious questions on politicization and collusion of interests against Sri Lanka. 
Mr. President, the Government of Sri Lanka categorically rejects the High Commissioner’s Report (A/HRC/25/23) emanating from resolution 22/1.  It may be recalled that from the adoption of resolution 22/1, we upheld its contravention of GA resolution 60/251 as well as the Council resolutions 5/1 and 5/2 which guide the work and method of engagement of the Council. 

Sri Lanka will share its observations on the substantive content of the Report (A/HRC/25/23), including the considerable factual inaccuracies and misperceptions contained therein, during its consideration on 26 March. However, for purposes of record there are some aspects to which, I wish to draw your attention to at this juncture.

The High Commissioner’s Report has exceeded its mandate by making reference to and recommendations on numerous issues extraneous to the resolution. Additionally, the recommendations contained in the Report are arbitrary, intrusive and of a political nature, and are not placed within the ambit of the LLRC, as demonstrated by the call to establish an international inquiry mechanism. Further, this recommendation is in contravention of her mandate granted by GA Resolution 48/141, particularly Articles 3(a) and 4(g). In the Government’s detailed “Comments” on the Report, it has also regretted that the High Commissioner has raised concerns regarding a range of issues based on information of questionable veracity and conclusions arrived at in a selective and arbitrary manner. Sri Lanka’s Comments have attempted to address some of the errors and misperceptions contained in the Report.

The references made in the Council welcoming the High Commissioner’s Report on Sri Lanka, even at the highest level of the UN are regrettable particularly considering that it is based on questionable and baseless material including what has been processed outside the UN framework.  The Council may recall in this regard that the Panel of Experts Report which was the culmination of a private consultation that the Secretary General sought for his own advice, and is not the product of any intergovernmental process, has been extensively resorted to by the High Commissioner in her Report to the Council, in a bid to legitimise it within the UN framework despite the lack of mandate in this regard.

It is universally accepted that the High Commissioner and the OHCHR must remain transparent, objective and be guided solely by the mandate given by the UN. However, if the initiatives taken on Sri Lanka at this juncture by the OHCHR is to be the basis on which the country is to be  judged, it will clearly be a travesty of justice.  

It is in this context that we greatly value the sentiments expressed in the Council by countries which have similar experiences with regard to reconciliation, that Sri Lanka be provided with the requisite time and space to address their own process domestically in a comprehensive manner as opposed to those who continue to pay disproportionate attention to Sri Lanka, based on agendas driven by political motives.

The Government of Sri Lanka therefore reiterates its rejection of resolution 22/1, as well as the High Commissioner’s Report in its entirety which are fundamentally flawed. These initiatives disregard the substantial progress made by the Government during the five years which have elapsed since the end of the thirty year war against terrorism. They also pay scant regard to the complexities and local nuances of a sensitive reconciliation process, while eroding confidence of the people of Sri Lanka by the constant changing of unjustifiable demands. Moreover, they persist in an attitude which is clearly disproportionate to the circumstances and inconsistent with the treatment of comparable situations. It is much to be regretted that the High Commissioner’s Report and those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process by bringing about a polarisation of the Sri Lankan society.

In conclusion, Mr. President, Sri Lanka reiterates its continued cooperation and engagement with the work of the Council.

Thank You

05 March 2014, Geneva

Sri Lanka scores preliminary moral victory at UNHRC 2014

March 4th, 2014

Shenali D Waduge

 The hype behind the US sponsored third resolution against Sri Lanka looks to be frizzling out with US/UK and India managing to get as co-sponsors nations that would hardly constitute power bases. Thus the 2 world bullies and their stooge together with Montenegro, Macedonia and Mauritius have placed the 1st draft forward. Nations of the UNHRC are obviously more concerned about the situation in Ukraine where a democratic leader has been replaced by a US puppet. If this could happen to Ukraine representatives of the UNHRC and the UN General Assembly must seriously think the likelihood of a similar situation arising in their countries too. Neocolonial agendas are being pushed through using the UN and foreign government funded NGOs and their local stooges are helping lay the foundations.

Returning to the Sri Lanka situation it appears that a Commission of Inquiry has been replaced with a Pillay inquiry. Navi Pillay is however not without the need to investigate her own conduct. Her behavior and actions against Libya and Syria requires that all UNHRC member nations request a review of her suitability for the post. No one expects an official to simply follow instructions of the West. It is what Louis Arbor did and look what happened to Yugoslavia. Mass graves became the lies used and mass graves, sexual violations and scores of other seeds have been planted by Pillay to be used against Sri Lanka when she does take over such an inquiry that is likely to be recommended.

Nations voting must seriously address some key concerns which are relevant to their own nations as well.

Sri Lanka is moving on with life after 30 years of terrorism. Throughout the 30 years the very parties who are dictating Sri Lanka’s post-conflict efforts did not come forward to help end terrorism. They simply watched LTTE murder every day, every month and every year. Scores of civilians became calculated targets and all these deaths got was a condolence statement and nothing else. Now since the target is regime change the ‘both sides to blame’ statement is brandied thinking they can get away for the former negligence. The organizations are heavily funded from overseas so naturally they take orders from them and these orders are to destabalize the country and for that they are paid – should such people earn anyone’s respect when they live in a country and use their positions to turn a country over and leave people suffering for which they get handsomely paid?

Moreover the UN Secretary General and Navi Pillay are on record for continuously concentrating only on the last stages of the conflict … now when it suits their agenda they are prepared to expand. However, having rehabilitated scores of former LTTE cadres who are getting on with their lives the people of Sri Lanka feel that there is no requirement for them to again be brought to the dock because it is not going to get anyone anywhere. Infrastructure and other requirements are being met and time is needed to allow people to start their lives afresh. People who took no part in stopping terror have no right to now come forward to demand how Sri Lanka should run its post-conflict.

Of course no country is perfect. Everything has a good and bad side. The Tamil National Alliance on whom much of the complaints are sourced from are not ideal parties to obtain a balanced stand. These representatives are those that LTTE helped get elected and their manifestos are proof that they openly aligned to the LTTE and referred to them as the sole representatives of the Tamils. These are all documented proof with evidence.

Moreover, sourcing from NGOs in Sri Lanka and their heads is not a credible feature as well. They were totally silent during LTTE reign and did not issue any statements against the LTTE. Similarly, LTTE Tamil Diaspora who are holding foreign passports and are non-citizens of Sri Lanka can hardly dictate on what type of mechanism should be introduced for they helped raise the funds for the LTTE and none of them minded LTTE kidnapping Tamil children and turning them into killers. None of them helped put up a single road, school, hospital or even provided electricity. Now after 30 years areas of the North are enjoying what they never had under LTTE rule.

Of course we do have a score against India, though for political reasons Governments are unwilling to openly blame India for the initial training of LTTE and other militant groups clandestinely as well as providing South India as a logistics hub throughout the 30 years even after Rajiv Gandhis assassination. LTTE was for India a political tool to bargain with Sri Lanka’s Government but for every death the LTTE caused, India has a moral guilt for its role.

Pillay has made issue of the newest subject the West through UN will use against countries – religion. She is stoic silent on half of UK mosques being attacked but giving the impression of Sri Lanka being anti-Muslim when there are only 22 incidents (in 3 years) of which 5 have already been settled and the majority are due to illegal constructions while in the case of the Christian religious issues that too has been as a result of forced conversions and the setting up of illegal prayer centers funded by US missionaries. Of course the blame rests with the public officials who have not functioned using the laws in place. Anyhow 700 mosque attacks in UK against less than 20 in Sri Lanka hardly qualifies Pillay to make such scathing judgements.

Pillay has also ventured into correlating rape with Sri Lankan military presence that too has been exposed in view of 18 cases of rape (in 7 years) by Sri Lankan military when the cases of rape by Tamils amount to 504. Thus, she is silent on 504 rapes by Tamils upon Tamils but she has a case for 18 rapes and attempts to relate that to her next move to demand the removal of the Sri Lankan army from the North – thus the calls for demilitarization.

If Pillay’s UNHRC lens is directed only at the Third World or nations that the US/UK target there is little point in nations taking part in these UNHRC forums.

These movements by Pillay are now prophesied by a very alert Sri Lankan public who are keenly studying the developments of Western power blocs and their use of the UN.

As far as Resolutions go, the Indian American sent to Sri Lanka recently says that the ‘international community’ is losing patience with Sri Lanka and thus the 3rd Resolution, all we can say is what about the Resolutions against Israel… do these not run into double figures and have these Resolutions not been vetoed by the US… and what has Pillay done about them? Why is there no patience for Sri Lanka recovering from 30 years of terror and enjoying 4 years of peace as against countless Resolutions against Israel most of which have been vetoed by the US?

Can we know if the UN categorizes its members as Good, the Bad and the Ugly… and has different sets of standards for each… we thought the UN and its heads were to function without bias… however we see double standards at play. We are well placed to give examples.

It is a good time for the Third World nations to arise, Africa, Asia, Latin America must take stock of the manner the West has inflicted internal strife so that these nations are kept bogged down in conflicts while they depose nationalist leaders and replace them with puppets who are ready to hand over whatever remaining resources available in their lands to plunder… the saddest part is that the West that steals from the Third World has not shared it amongst their people as we now witness ordinary Americans and ordinary Europeans suffering economic, employment and cultural hardships.

An United Africa, United Asia, United Latin America can change the world.

They must take the leadership to usher that change.

The time has come for the Third World to awake and take charge of their destinies.

2012 1.     Benin

2.     Cameron

3.     Libya

4.     Mauritius

5.     Nigeria

6.     India

7.     Chile

8.     Costa Rica

9.     Guatemala

10.   Peru

11.   Mexico

12.   Uruguay

13.   Austria

14.   Belgium

15.   Norway

16.   Italy

17.   Spain

18.   Switzerland

19.   United States

20.   Czech Republic

21.   Poland

22.   Hungary

23.   Moldova

24.  Romania

1.     Congo

2.     Mauritiana

3.     Uganda

4.     Bangladesh

5.     China

6.     Indonesia

7.     Kuwait

8.     Maldives

9.     Philippines

10.   Qatar

11.   Saudi Arabia

12.   Thailand

13.   Cuba

14.   Ecuador

15.  Russia

1.     Angola

2.     Botswana

3.     Burkina Faso

4.     Djibuti

5.     Senegal

6.     Jordan

7.     Krygystan

8.     Malaysia


2013 1.     Benin,

2.     the Ivory Coast, 

3.     Libya,

4.     Sierra Leone, 

5.     India,

6.     Korea,

7.     Argentina,

8.     Brazil, 

9.     Chile,

10.   Costa Rica,

11.   Guatemala,

12.   Peru, 

13.   Austria,

14.   Germany,

15.   Ireland, 

16.   Italy,

17.   Spain,

18.   Switzerland,

19.   USA,

20.   Czech Republic,

21.   Estonia,

22.   Montenegro, 

23.   Poland,

24.   Romania,

25.   Moldova.

1.     Venezuela, 

2.     Ecuador, 

3.     UAE,

4.     Thailand, 

5.     Qatar, 

6.     Philippines 

7.     Pakistan, 

8.     Maldives,

9.     Kuwait,

10.   Indonesia,

11.   Uganda,

12.   Mauritania,

13.   Congo (Rep not DR)

1.     Ethiopia, 

2.     Angola,

3.     Botswana,

4.     Burkina Faso,

5.     Kenya,

6.     Japan,

7.     Kazakhstan, 

8.     Malaysia.


2012 – 24 votes / 15 against / 8

2013 – 25 votes / 13 against / 8



UNHRC – Part I: Navi Pillay Faulted For Abuse of Power

March 4th, 2014

By Kalinga Seneviratne* | IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis

SINGAPORE (IDN) – UN Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) head Navi Pillay’s current campaign against Sri Lanka over alleged human rights violations – along with similar campaigns against Libya and Syria earlier – could jeopardize the cause of human rights around the world, analysts say.

Pillay released a report in February calling for an international investigation into alleged war crimes when the Sri Lankan armed forces crushed the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in a final battle in May 2009.

Navi Pillay | Courtesy: Wikimedia

Sri Lanka’s Permanent Envoy in Geneva conveying the Sri Lankan Government’s response to Pillay’s report stated that the UN High Commissioner’s recommendations, reflect the preconceived, politicised and prejudicial agenda which she has relentlessly pursued with regard to Sri Lanka”, and in a 18-page document pinpointed her double standards accusing her of giving scant or no regard to the domestic processes ongoing in Sri Lanka”.

The Sri Lanka government has also criticized the report for arriving at conclusions in a selective and arbitrary manner” and ignoring requests from the Sri Lankan government to provide factual evidence to substantiate allegations and to refrain from making general comments.

Sri Lanka’s criticism of Pillay is not new. But, commentaries in both mainstream and online media in Sri Lanka indicate a hardening of attitudes in the island state against Pillay’s perceived bias and alleged abuse of power as head of UNHRC. She is said to have got away with it in the international media because the western media apparently tended to believe – and continue to – most of the propaganda put out by the LTTE supporters in the Sri Lankan Tamil diaspora over the past 30 years.

At the twenty-fifth session of the UNHRC from March 3 to 28 in Geneva, Pillay’s report is due to be officially tabled, and she has refused to entertain a request from the Sri Lankan government that its response to the report be attached as an appendix. The United States has indicated – supported by EU and India – that they may table a resolution at the meeting to establish an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes and human rights violations in Sri Lanka, which the government is sure to reject.

How many of the bullying countries accusing Sri Lanka of crimes against humanity and war crimes have clean hands or a flawless record?” asks Senaka Weeraratna, a Sri Lankan lawyer and international affairs analyst.

What we see today in western dominated international organisations such as the United Nations related bodies such as the UNHRC, ICC and the like are proceedings conducted on an Inquisitorial footing i.e. witch hunts aimed at devastating the target country or individual usually of non–European descent thereby perverting the course of justice. No quarter is given to the other party until it submits to the political will of the bullying nations,” argues Weeraratna.

It is a shameless display of brute power making a mockery of institutional rules and procedures. The targeted country is assumed to be guilty right from the start ruling out any mitigating circumstances. It is virtually a re-enactment of the Inquisition under the auspices of the United Nations rather than the Catholic Church as in the days gone by.”

It is not only Sri Lankans that are complaining about the UNHRC and Pillay’s tactics. Anti-war activists in the West and supporters of the former Libyan regime and that of Syria have also pointed out how these UN agencies, and particularly UNHRC under Pillay, are practicing double standards to promote Western imperial designs.

Veteran Canadian antiwar activist Ken Stone writing for the website ‘Syria 360’ argued in an article written last year that Pillay has abused her power to facilitate western military interference in Libya and Syria to change regimes. He argues that the western media, and CNN in particular, have used interviews with Pillay to promote military intervention in Libya and Syria, where she relates the actions of these regimes to defend their country from rebel forces, to human rights violations and crimes against humanity.

In the name of humanitarian intervention

Two very useful precedents for illegal, but so-called ‘humanitarian’, intervention by NATO were set by the United Nations in regards to Libya,” argues Stone. The first was that the doctrine of the responsibility to protect (R2P) was successfully invoked, for the very first time, as a legal ground for over-riding the fundamental principle of national sovereignty as the basis of international law.”

R2P holds that, if a government cannot protect the human rights of its own citizens, the international community may step in to do so. In the case of Libya, R2P was used to justify United Nations Resolution 1973, the motion that authorized NATO to create a no-fly zone over Libya.

Resolution 1973 was perverted by NATO within hours into a full-blown military intervention for regime change in Libya that resulted in the deaths of thousands of Libyans, pogrom against black persons resident in Libya, the assassinations of Muammar Gaddafi and members of his family, massive infrastructure damage, the de facto partitioning of the country, and a failed state machine,” notes Stone.

He argues that the first precedent (above) could not have been realized without the fancy legal footwork executed in advance by the nimble Pillay in demonizing Mouammar Gaddafi and his son, Saif, at the UN. The second precedent, then, was the initiative taken by the UN Human Rights Council, chaired by Pillay, in calling for an international inquiry into violence against civilians in Libya,” he says.

Stone goes on to detail how Pillay has been playing a similar role in appearing in the international media accusing the Syrian government of crimes against humanity and calling upon the ICC to mount a war crimes investigation against President Assad, while ignoring the role played by foreign-funded mercenaries in the civil war.  Humanitarian intervention is a powerful tool in the West, where even people on the ‘left’, who should know better, fall for it,” notes Stone.

Libya is the real tragedy of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ that has turned into an ‘Arab Winter’. This brings into question the real motives of those International NGOs who promote human rights with an evangelical zeal.

Libya under Gaddafi may have been an authoritarian state in terms of freedom of speech (not any worse than U.S. allies in the region such as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and UAE), but, was a success story in human development. In Gaddafi’s Libya, the right to free education for everyone from elementary school right up to university and post-graduate studies at home or abroad were implemented with government subsidies; there was free health care with 1:673 doctor-patient ratio; free electricity for all citizen; interest-free housing loans; and free land for farmers.

Libya had no external debts and its reserves amounted to $150 billion. Today we have a Libya that is ruled by warlords and terrorists and human rights campaigners are silent about the human rights abuses taking place today in Libya and no one is asking the question what is happening to Libya’s huge financial reserves and its oil? Who is benefiting from it?

What happened in Libya amounts to a war crime for which both NATO and International Crisis Group (ICG) that came up with the R2P formula should be held accountable, analysts say. But, UNHRC is muted about it. Instead, a report will be tabled at the current session titled Technical assistance for Libya in the field of human rights”.

The report does not discuss accountability issues with regards to human rights in the implementation of the R2P formula nor does it address in any serious manner the problem of the anarchy created as a result of regime change. It assumes that there is a regime in charge, when there is not.

A question often asked by Sri Lankans is why Pillay is not calling upon President George W Bush, Tony Blair, David Cameroon and ICG to account for the war crimes USA, UK and NATO forces have indulged in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya?

During her visit to Sri Lanka last year, at a press conference, she said that UNHRC has indeed questioned these countries on certain human rights issues and they have responded. But, what the Sri Lankan journalist didn’t press her on is why she cannot do the same with Sri Lanka, rather than indulge in a public spat and witchhunt?

Opening up old wounds

Most people in Sri Lanka believe that what she is trying to do is to open up old wounds and it is completely counter productive to promoting reconciliation between the Sinhalese and Tamil communities. Nor is it helping to improve human rights in Sri Lanka, where a government that is threatened by what they see as an international conspiracy to change regime, has cracked down heavily on internal dissent and freedom of expression.

Weeraratna argues that Pillay’s methods are harming human rights and increasing the credibility gap of UN agencies in the eyes of the international community (which is not just the U.S., EU and its allies). Instead he argues that UNHRC should adopt the Japanese model of solving a post-war crisis.

The Japanese approach advocated by the Buddhist Prince Shotuku to use the method of consensus and dialogue, and not allow the accused party to lose face is a far more enlightened approach to resolution of complex human rights issues than the ‘ burning at the stake’ inquisitorial approach of the West” notes Weeraratna.

It is the employment of double standards and devious methods to achieve ulterior political ends of powerful Western actors that have resulted in the moral collapse of the UN and related agencies.”


*Kalinga Seneviratne is IDN Special Correspondent for Asia-Pacific. He teaches international communications at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

[IDN-InDepthNews – March 3, 2014]

The writer’s previous IDN articles:

The Spirit of the Christian Inquisition returns to the UNHRC to take Sri Lanka to the stake

March 4th, 2014

Shenali D. Waduge, SRI LANKA

The Christian Inquisition in Europe, Goa and other parts of the Portuguese Empire of Asia including Sri Lanka, goes down in history as one of the most horrible crimes against humanity. The Inquisition launched by the Vatican, Catholic Church, civil authorities of Spain and Portugal paved the way for a brutal legal system in most parts of Europe that lasted for over 600 years. There was neither a Rule of Law, nor respect for Human Rights nor religious tolerance in Europe during the period of the Inquisition. Heretics were burned at the stake for merely refusing to believe Christian dogma. 

In no other part of the civilized world did such brutality on such a massive scale and consistently for 600 years take place. No amount of European or Christian propaganda to the contrary will be able to erase this stark truth of savage conduct. Much of the world’s noble values e.g.  religious freedom, tolerance, respect for human and animal rights, reverence for all forms of life, acceptance of difference of opinion, peaceful co –existence between human and animal, Social order on Dharmic principles, decision making through dialogue and consensus, non – violence (Ahimsa) and the like are all products of Eastern wisdom.    

The state of mind that launched the Inquisition is the same state of mind that fashioned European policies and conduct resulting in plundering colonialism, crusades, transatlantic slave trade and enslavement of black, brown and yellow people, total extermination of native races such as the Australian Aborgines, Red Indians (North America), Mayas and Incas (South America), various communities of Black Africans that were illegally transported to the new world,  opium trade in China, and the Indian and Jewish Holocaust. 

 This is shameful conduct of the highest order for which there is no appropriate language to describe. The crimes are compounded by a lack of genuine atonement, apologies, and suitable compensation to victims and descendants of victims. The clash of civilizations will continue so long as this enormous debt remains unpaid. It will not be forgotten however much one side wants to do so. Scores have to be settled.     

 Inquisitorial Mindset

An Inquisitorial mindset still governs the Christian West.  At the UNHRC vote on March 22, 2012 the US and European Union (all Christian countries) sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka was adopted with 24 countries voting for the resolution and 15 against it. Eight countries abstained from voting.

 An analysis of the voting pattern at Geneva shows that the overwhelming majority of countries that voted against Sri Lanka were predominantly Christian countries (with exceptions like India, a largely Hindu nation, but governed by a Christian led Congress whose leader Sonia Gandhi (Italian born Roman Catholic) is heavily influenced by the dictates of the Vatican, and a few African countries subject to blackmail of withdrawal of foreign aid and technical assistance). Eighteen (18) of the 24 countries that voted against Sri Lanka belong to the Christian civilization and a large majority of them are from the Christian bloc of European nations.

 A similar pattern of voting was repeated in the UNHRC vote against Sri Lanka sponsored by Christian nations (USA and EU) held in March 2013.  Quite a number of the movers and co – sponsors of the Resolution against Sri Lanka are former colonial countries that had suppressed the basic liberties of the indigenous people of Asia, Africa and America (both North and South) in the most barbaric fashion for over 500 years, and were never called upon by international criminal law to account for their colonial crimes.

 Religious Discrimination at the UN

 Since the inception of the UN in 1945 all holders of the high office of UN Secretary – General to date have been Christians bar one i.e. Burmese U. Thant (Buddhist). No Muslim, No Hindu, No Jain have ever been offered that position despite the requirement under the UN Charter rules for rotation of incumbents based on different  civilizational backgrounds. The present incumbent Ban Ki Moon is an ardent Church going Christian fiercely loyal to the global mission of the Christian Church and its self – declared object of world conquest and domination.    

 The Christian West has no qualms of conscience or self – doubt  in manipulating international institutions and international law principles  for their  ‘self-benefit ‘ and ‘self – advancement’, while remaining indifferent to the concerns and rights of non-European people. This fact has been well analysed by the former Indian diplomat and scholar, Dr. K.M. Panikkar in his ground breaking book ‘Asia and Western Domination – A Survey of the Vasco De Gama Epoch of Asian History 1498 – 1945, published in 1953.

 Dubious Doctrine of Different Rights for Blacks and Whites

Panikkar says that western colonial powers were reluctant to recognise that doctrines of international law applied outside Europe or that European nations had any moral obligations when dealing with Asian people. Panikkar avers that this doctrine of different rights (which made a mockery of the concepts of Human Rights and Rule of Law) persisted to the very end of western colonial domination and was a prime cause of Europe’s ultimate failure in Asia.

Hugo Grotius, Dutch jurist, was basically an imperialist. He never questioned or challenged the equity or moral validity of Dutch Colonialism which ravaged Indonesia, Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and several other parts of the world. He was a supporter of colonial adventures and always assumed that Jus Gentium rules (law of nations or international law) applied only between Christian nations of Europe, and other races, peoples and nations (outside Europe) had no right to invoke these international law principles. 

In 2012 Sri Lanka was crucified at the UNHRC. In 2013 Sri Lanka was again crucified at the UNHRC. The crime Sri Lanka committed was to take a national decision and eliminate a terrorist movement. For defying West’s orders Sri Lanka was taken to the stake twice. The inquisition against Sri Lanka is not over. In 2014 too Sri Lanka is being dragged once more gagged and cornered by UN ‘rights’ ‘freedoms’ and terminologies that keep Sri Lanka from raising her voice in defense. The relentless venom of vengeance for going against Western rule of law is why Sri Lanka is facing the torture methods no different to the ecclesiastical court set up by the Roman Catholic Church meting out brutal punishments to those who differed.

We are disappointed with India in the manner it has forsaken its rich Hindu heritage to go behind the US, the same can be said of Japan and South Korea. There was no moral authority during the Inquisition and there is no moral authority now in the manner the West is functioning using the UN as its hobby horse. All the international laws have been designed to suit the West and western cultures, thinking and norms. Every new term being used replaces all concepts that existed previously and have all to do with maintaining Western superiority over non-whites.

 Beware of the West

It is high time that Asians and Africans realized that the leaders of the West are no sincere friends. They are out to corner us, bring us down and ruin us. There is no such thing as credible institutions, their so called inquiries are nothing but inquisitions and the new ‘witness protection’ systems subtly being introduced are to ensure their rule prevails unchallenged.

That status quo can change if and when non – white countries realize this invidious game plan and come forward to say ‘no’ and demand a reversal to the criminalities taking place under the bogey of transparency and human rights. 

 If the country belongs to us we must claim it as ours and resist incursions otherwise we will be treated like the unfortunate Australian aborigines who failed to put up a proper fight to defend their land when the British arrived and claimed ownership to Aborginal land.  The colonial principle loudly proclaimed then and even now is that ‘If you fail to defend the land from a foreign intruder you forfeit the right to claim the land as yours’.  

In Sri Lanka our ancestors, except for the treacherous Sepoys and Lascoreens, fought gallantly and protected this nation from our enemies i.e. foreign conquerors, for over 300 years – we need to do the same. We must never give up. This is the message we need to take to the world.

THE GENEVA TRAP: Can private citizens help devise an escape-route?

March 4th, 2014

Dharshan Weerasekera

‘Flawed UN Strategy’
A reply to Vernon Boteju (Senior Attorney at Law)

UN Human Rights High Commissioner Navi Pillay’s long-awaited report on Sri Lanka is finally out. In it, she does exactly what I predicted in a paper published a few weeks ago in the Foreign Policy Journal, (The UN’s Sri Lanka Strategy and its implications for international law”) to wit: whereas up to March-2013 the primary and principal basis for allegations of war crimes against the Government was the Report of the Secretary General’s Panel of Experts (POE) of March 2011, the High Commissioner is now introducing entirely new sources of evidence, including the Channel 4 videos, and recommending that international investigations be initiated to investigate these new allegations, plus the POE’s allegations.

Supreme Court complex

The advantage in this strategy is that, no matter what the Government says to the new allegations, Sri Lanka’s critics can still pass a resolution authorizing or recommending international investigations, if they have enough votes. Presumably, the critics, led by the United States, are confident they can muster the requisite votes. So, the Geneva trap is set. Is there any way to foil this plan? I have always been of the view that the option of seeking an advisory opinion at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) offers a way out. The Government, however, may be reluctant to raise the spectre of an advisory opinion at this particular point in time, due to geopolitical as well as domestic realities it has to face.

Given this situation, is there anything that private citizens, and organizations consisting of friends of Sri Lanka, can do to help protect what they feel are the long-term interests of this country, including its sovereignty and territorial integrity? I believe there is, and I believe the following three options are worth considering. I emphasize, however, that these options are only suggestions, thought experiments” if you will, to encourage further discussion and research into these important issues, rather than definitive recommendations. The three options are:

1) The complaint procedures of the Human Rights Council

In my view, Sri Lanka’s strongest argument when it comes to resisting resolutions against it at the Human Rights Council is the fact that the reports, documents or materials on which allegations of war crimes have been leveled against it have never been filed officially with the Council, and Sri Lanka has never been given an opportunity to officially respond to them. This is an ex facie violation of Sri Lanka’s rights under General Assembly resolution 60/251, the Charter” of the Human Rights Council, which mandates, among other things, that the work of the Council shall be guided by the principles of constructive international dialogue and cooperation.”

In order to have constructive dialogue” of any sort, international or otherwise, it is necessary that the participants be acquainted with all sides of the issue that is the subject of the dialogue.” In Sri Lanka’s case, accusations of war crimes have been leveled, but the reports, documents and materials on which those accusations are based have not been placed officially on record, so Sri Lanka has not had a chance to go before the Council and tell its side of the story. (Certainly Sri Lanka has been able to file replies to the accusations informally, but that is not the same as responding officially, and in front of the Council.) Under these circumstances, no constructive international dialogue” is possible.

As for cooperation,” if a member continually requests that they be given an opportunity to respond officially to the accusations being made against them, and the Council continues to pass resolutions against that member without in any way trying to accommodate the request, it is hardly a situation of cooperation”: in fact it is the very antithesis of cooperation.”

More important, one can make a very good case that the Council in its actions on Sri Lanka is violating the latter’s rights under the UN Charter also. The UN Charter, it should be recalled, is the primary basis of international law, and the supreme document from which the Human Rights Council itself derives authority. The Council is obliged to defer to the UN Charter in all matters that involve the rights and privileges of UN members.

The UN Charter makes it abundantly clear that its overarching purpose is to develop harmony and friendly relations between nations, whether in maintaining international peace and security, in achieving universal peace, or in solving common problems of an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character. For instance, Article 1(4) says explicitly that the Organization is to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.” To turn to some of the principles that undergird the UN, one of the primary principles is set out in Article 2(1), which says, The Organization is based on the principle of the Sovereign equality of all its members.”

Does the treatment accorded Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council comport with either the purpose of developing harmony and friendly relations among nations, or the principle of the Sovereign equality” of all nations? I don’t think so. The Council’s conduct in denying Sri Lanka an opportunity to respond officially to accusations being made against it, on an equal footing with its accusers, engenders, in my view, not harmony, but disharmony, acrimony, suspicion and distrust, and is at its very essence a rejection of the principle of the sovereign equality of all nations!

My point is that, if such flagrant wrongs are being committed, it may be possible to resort to the Complaint Procedures of the Human Rights Council. Private individuals and organizations can lodge complaints under these procedures. Needless to say, the complaint itself may not get taken up, but the very fact of having made the complaint would put the issue on the official record” of the Council, which would make it easier to agitate on the issue later, if needed.

2) The inherent jurisdiction of the ICJ

Inherent jurisdiction is a revered concept in the English Common Law, now almost universally recognized. In essence, inherent jurisdiction is the doctrine that a superior court can intervene in the proceedings of a lower court or tribunal in order to prevent a gross miscarriage of justice, for instance, where the court perceives there has been a grave abuse of process or of justice in the aforesaid proceedings.

The ICJ, it should be recalled, is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. As such, it is the highest judicial forum in the world, and perhaps can rightly be called the very sanctum of international law, especially with respect to guarding the integrity of the UN Charter.

If, as I have suggested, flagrant and egregious wrongs are being committed against Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council, an institution set up under the authority of the UN Charter, it is an abuse of the Charter itself, and therefore naturally a matter of concern to the ICJ. Under the ICJ Statute, however, only countries can be parties in disputes before the Court (or, in the case of advisory opinions, also certain authorized UN Organs). Private individuals, organizations, or groups cannot under normal circumstances seek solace of the court.

My idea is that, under the extraordinary circumstances prevalent with respect to Sri Lanka at present, an organization or group of persons invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the Court by informing the Court in writing of what is going on in the Council with respect to Sri Lanka, and requesting the Court to look into the matter.

I believe the following observation of the Court in the Nuclear Tests case indicates not only that the court is cognizant of its inherent powers, but may be receptive to appeals that invoke it. In that famous case, the court said, By virtue of an inherent jurisdiction which the court possesses qua judicial organ, it has to first examine a question which it finds to be essentially preliminary, namely the existence of a dispute for, whether or not the Court has jurisdiction in the present case, the resolution of that question could exert a decisive influence on the continuation of these proceedings.” (New Zealand v. France, 1974,

It may be that the Court will refrain from even looking at the petition in the instant case, but I am sure the Court will at least write back acknowledging receipt of the petition, and give some reason as to why it can’t be taken up. The fact of the reply would make the petition a part of the official record of the ICJ, and thus also of the UN, and would be helpful if, at some future date, the Government decides to ask the Court for an advisory opinion on the matter in question, and Sri Lanka’s critics raise a preliminary objection that Sri Lanka did not assert its rights at the proper time.

3) The inherent jurisdiction of the Sri Lanka Supreme Court

My idea is that a citizen would be able to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the Sri Lanka Supreme Court and ask the Court to issue a declaration or recommendation to the Government to seek an advisory opinion of the ICJ before accepting or implementing any recommendations concerning international investigations made in a Human Rights Council resolution.

Article 3 of the Sri Lanka Constitution clearly states, In the republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the people.” If sovereignty is in the people,” it means every single citizen shares equally in that sovereignty, and any imposition, compromise or diminution of the country’s sovereignty is an imposition, compromise and diminution of the sovereignty of the individual citizen, thus making the citizen an interested party in the transaction.

In my view, international investigations on Sri Lanka constitute an attempt to impose on, compromise, and diminish the sovereignty of this country, among other things, especially in the following manner. If one looks closely at the High Commissioner’s report of February 24, 2014 (A/HRC/25/23), the report on which a resolution against Sri Lanka at the upcoming March sessions of the Council will be based, one sees that the report cites concerns with respect to alleged violations of humanitarian law (i.e. acts done during the last stages of the war) and also ongoing human rights violations, including continuing militarization,” compulsory land acquisition (particularly in the North and East),” attacks on religious minorities, and so on.

It is not clear whether the High Commissioner’s recommendation for international investigations is limited to the humanitarian law issues only, or whether they are to involve some of the human rights issues also: at any rate, a resolution could be phrased in a manner that includes those human rights issues.

If an international team of investigators is inserted into Sri Lanka, a team controlled in some fashion or other by Sri Lanka’s critics, it would be an easy enough thing to get that team to conclude or to insinuate in their final report that Sri Lanka is a horrible place in terms of human rights, especially for minorities, and out of the minorities, specifically for the Tamils, because their areas” are being militarized,” Tamil lands being subjected to compulsory acquisition,” and so on. In short, it would be an easy enough thing for the team to make a pronouncement or an insinuation that the Tamils of Sri Lanka are a people under occupation, of some sort or another.

If an international panel with UN backing were to make such a pronouncement or insinuation, it would provide very substantial grounds for separatist elements within this country, aided by their supporters in the Diaspora, to move for a separate state by invoking the concept self determination” under international law.

In this regard, it should be noted that it is generally accepted in international jurisprudence that a right to self determination” under international law exists in three types of situations: one, where a people” is governed as part of a colonial empire, two, where a people” is subject to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation, and three, possibly where a people” is completely denied any meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, cultural and social development. (See, Reference re Secession of Quebec (1998) 2SCR 217)

A pronouncement or insinuation by an international panel that Tamil areas” are being militarized,” that Tamil lands are being confiscated, and so on, can obviously be used by separatists as a basis to claim that Tamils in this country are being systematically subjugated and exploited, that their lives are being made unbearable, and thereby to gain international endorsement for a demand for self determination” under international law as per the second and third scenarios sketched above.

In this regard, I would be remiss if I did not mention the remark of TNA leader Mr. R. Sampanthan in 2012, on the occasion of the 14th National Convention of the ITAK. He said, The current practices of the international community may give us an opportunity to achieve, without the loss of life, the soaring aspirations we were unable to achieve by armed struggle.” (Address of R. Sampanthan at 14th National Convention of ITAK in Batticaloa, May 27, 2012)

In short, an international endorsement of a pronouncement or insinuation by an international panel that the Tamils of Sri Lanka are an oppressed and subjugated minority is precisely the foundation on which separatist elements can begin their final push to divide this country.

To return, my point is that if the above is one of the possible outcomes of a resolution authorizing or recommending international investigations, it is a matter that strikes at the very heart of this country’s sovereignty, and a matter of which the Supreme Court can take cognizance. A citizen of this country, as an interested party, could petition the Court to use its inherent jurisdiction and look into the matter, and, if the Court in its wisdom deems the danger real, to recommend to the Government not to allow any international investigations until an advisory opinion is first obtained from the ICJ.

So, those are three things that I think private citizens and organizations can do to help protect the long-term interests of this country. I reiterate that these ideas are offered only as fuel for discussion and debate: I would be happy to be corrected if I’m wrong in any of the ideas sketched above, happier if anyone can extend and refine them, and happiest if my brief discussion here inspires a reader to offer entirely new, and better, ideas.

Dharshan Weerasekera is an Attorney-at-Law. He is the author of, The UN’s Relentless Pursuit of Sri Lanka, and the need for effective counter-measures.

- See more at:

US Human Rights Record 2013 – The Emperor disrobed

March 3rd, 2014

 Shenali D Waduge SRI LANKA

It is time the world stood up against a tyrant that is destroying world peace and exposes not only the tyrant but the other nations working in association with the tyrant. It is only then can the world find true peace. Should the world continue to heed derogatory statements and reports issued by the US State Department on nations while the US blatantly violates every law in existence and the UN can only silently watch because its officials have degraded themselves by bowing at the feet of imperialists headed by the US? Planet earth has been abused enough, peoples rights have been violated, nations have been flogged by a handful of nations who are being steered by corporates and financiers who want to loot nations. Americans and the people of the world now need to rise against these tyrants so we may all live in peace without being manipulated.

Is it for a joke that the US drafts Resolutions against nations when its own crimes are nothing it can preach to nations and accountability of US has not been forthcoming for any of America’s violations?

When US denounces nations, ridicules them its record for 2013 is nothing America can be proud of

  • 30 mass killings in 12 months with 137 people dead
  • The Uniform Crime Report released by the FBI has registered 1.2million violent crimes (1,214,464) in 2012 of which

o   14,827 were murders and non-negligent manslaughters,

o   84,376 forcible rapes

o   354,522 robberies

o   760,739 aggravated assaults

  • US tells nations to give people, media and journalists full independence and privacy. What does US do in America? US taps Americans, US has been spying on Americans and foreigners both at home and abroad, even EU leaders including German Chancellor Merkel were victim. So what does UN Secretary General and Navi Pillay have to say about violation of human rights. Well they don’t say anything against the US but they have enough of statements against all of America’s targeted nations – why is she silent on the solitary confinement of about 80,000 US prisoners for over 40 years?
  • When US has all the money to hand out for various regime change programs and to buy over Bar Associations, create student unrest, purchase foreign politicians etc.. could this money not have been used to deal with unemployment in the US where lowest-income families have topped 21% and in the land where dreams are supposed to come true there is a homeless population that has climbed to 16%.
  • When American envoys in foreign nations delivers speeches about the rights of children, they forget that back home there are child laborers in the agricultural sector. According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 41,310 youth under 16 years were hired in farms. It is believed that 400,000 to 500,000 kids worked on farms in 2012.
  • When US sheds crocodile tears about civilian deaths and calls for accountability mechanisms and gives knee-jerks to the UN heads to go after nations the US targets, they completely ignore the drone strikes taking place in Pakistan and Yemen. the US has carried out 376 drone strikes in Pakistan since 2004 killing 926 civilians. Is there no international investigation mechanism for US killing of civilians, Ms. Navi Pillay or does the US have a carte blanche to kill?
  • Let us also not forget that this country that goes preaching round the world has refused to sign key UN conventions – International Covenant of Economics, Social and Cultural Rights, Convention on the Elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities to name a few.
  • A FBI sex-trafficking sweep on 76 cities in July 2013 revealed 105 sexually exploited teenagers as young as 13 showing cases of sexual abuse against children as well. A report by the Chicago Tribune has revealed that 111 children lost their lives from abuse or neglect in Illonois only in 2012 a majority of them were just 1 year old. Annually the deaths of children from abuse is 1545.
  • FBI figures for 2013 reveals that that there are 21,093,273 privately owned guns in the USA. As of  2013, there were about 300million guns in the US. Yet, on an average more than 100,000 Americans are being shot each year, 30,000 of deaths are by the gun. 11,000 Americans are killed by gun violence  (UK Telegraph/Dec 2013). Mass shootings led to 404 people shot and 207 people killed from 2009 to 2012 (Huffington Post/Oct 2013)
  • If not for Edward Snowden, Americans or the world would not have known that the US was spying on people. People would not have known that US was using data of 9 internet companies including Microsoft, Google, Apple, Facebook, Yahoo to track people’s private contacts and social activities. The Washington Post revealed that the US NSA had tapped directly into the central servers of these internet companies and extracted their emails, chats, audio and video data, documents, photos. The UK Guardian revealed that Verizon Business Network Services Inc provided the NSA all the telephony metadata within its system including telephone numbers, locations and call durations. The country that asks other nations to give full privacy to people had been secretly spying on people and continues to do so.
  • the California Pelican Bay prison is said to have more than 400 prisoners kept in isolation for over a decade while others have been kept in solitary isolation for over 40 years. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendex urged the US to abolish the use of solitary confinement – we do not need to ask the likely outcome!
  • The word America loves to dole out freely is ‘democracy’ but research shows American’s influence on policy is proportionate to their wealth with over 70% of Americans belonging to the lower wealth /income group having NO influence over US policy. In reality only 1/10th of 1% end up enjoying ‘democracy’ in America. They make the policies and they break the policies as they see fit. This is why less Americans are no registering to vote. In Los Angeles Mayoral election only 23% cast their ballot.
  • Even US veterans are unemployed – 6.9% as of October 2013. 246,000 post 9/11 war veterans are looking for jobs.
  • There are more than 47million Americans living in poverty (2012 – US Census Bureau). Poverty rate is 15%. 6.4million aged 65years and older were poor (Reuters/2013). The gap between America’s rich and poor is the widest in history as revealed by the US Internal Revenue Service data of 2012 and highest since 1917.
  • Data released by PEW says that the unions lost 400,00 members. It has become a trend to declare bankruptcy and become eligible for bankruptcy protection but people end up in the lurch.
  • There are 57,737 homeless Americans in Los Angeles. The number of homeless in New York is more than 71% with over 60,000 people including 22,000 children homeless.
  • 15.4% or 48milion Americans are uninsured. 1.3million jobless Americans are receiving $300 per week.
  • The country that did not allow blacks to sit next to whites, travel in buses or even sold land and property to blacks today preaches against racial discrimination while surveys reveal that racial discrimination remains very much alive.

o   136 African Americans UNARMED CIVILIANS were killed by US policemen in 2012

o   UNARMED black youth – Jonathan Ferrel, sought help after a car accident but he was shot multiple times and killed by the police (New York 2013)

o   a Black lady was handcuffed and brutally beaten by 2 white cops for an unpaid fine (UK Daily Mail)

o   Racially biased stops/interrogations often occur in the US – a US district judge says at least 200,000 stops were made by New York police without reasonable suspicion.

o   Arrests of blacks for marijuana usage was more than whites though both were addicted

o   2/3 women in state prisons incarcerated for drug offences were Hispanic or Black though whites were also drug users at the same rate.

o   Travyvon Martin was shot dead by George Zimmerman – several cities made protests

o   racial and sex discrimination is rampant throughout US workplaces. From 2006-2010 payouts in Los Angeles Fire Department against harassment cases cost more than $17million.

  • America loves to use the words ‘racist’ ‘communal’ ‘extremists’ for everyone else but America thinks that it is perfectly fine for America to say ‘kill everyone in China’ (ABCs Jimmy Kimmel Show) ‘Latino voters are greedy and lazy socialist, and that’s why they don’t vote for Republicans” (American Family Association/a leading religious rights group)
  • America loves to look into the domestic affairs of sovereign nations and cries over the indigenous rights of people in other nations but back home the Rights of the real owners of American lands suffer abuse and violence. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of the Indigenous People’s highlighted high rates of violence against American indigenous women by non-indigenous men.
  • In America women face serious employment discrimination. Women’s salary is far lower than men’s. Both women and children are subject to violent attacks even sexual. Females are strip-searched as the Indian diplomat found out recently. A women arrested for drunk-driving had several bones shattered in her face (Chicago Tribune/2013). Domestic violence is also a serious issue – 64,324 victims of violent attacks in just one-24hour period in 2012. Even US female soldiers are experiencing frequent sexual assaults. Military Times reveal that 6.1% of active duty women have experienced unwanted sexual contact. While 14% of military victims report their assaults 64% of convicted sexual perpetrators get discharged from the military.

A country that violates human rights both at home and abroad does not deserve an iota of respect or centre stage in any international public forum. We are talking about a country that has used the atomic bomb twice in the space of 3 days knowing what the outcome was when they released it on 6th August 1945 upon Hiroshima. This country has been sending unmanned drones, bombing nations to bring ‘democracy’ while a merry team of the same corporate and financiers run off with the wealth of nations leaving nothing for ordinary Americans or even the soldiers who have been used as guinea pigs by the Governments and their officials. We are talking about the US Government who have planned and plotted to secretly tap and violate the rights of their own people because they know what they are doing is wrong and they do not want to be caught and found out by the American masses. Today, the American people have found too late that they have fallen prey to bogus ‘terrorist’ claims and promises of greater security by the US state but instead under the pretext of securing the rights of the American people, the US Government has denied them these rights.

Finally the American people are realizing that they have been fooled. Is it too late? A handful of evil people get the dirty work done by others who are paid to carry out orders. It is time these parties realized the wrong they are committing and refuse to be party to the evil that is taking place around us. The UN heads are equally to blame for they have silently allowed a monster to dictate to the world’s nations, bully these nations and bring them to their knees by various covert and overt plots and plans that have been engineered and orchestrated simply using the power of money to buy over people. These illegal schemes and plots are well known but no one in power is willing to take the initiative to rally the people around to stop the charade. America has been upto every evil we can imagine though we must clearly distinguish between the American public and the American leaders and their coterie of ultra rich who are the real culprits of the evil that prevails. The ordinary masses are ignorant and have been fed lies by their own leaders.

It is now time that the UN General Assembly nations resolve to put a stop to the unethical practices that the US and a handful of other nations wanting to subjugate the world and dominate them are currently doing in what is a white supremacist imperial neocolonial agenda. The Third World needs to regroup, reassess, realign themselves to a new economic order, bridge the gaps between the rich and power. Hungary set an example by kicking out IMF and giving debt-free loans. The people have been flogged enough it is time that the Third World leaders stop being vassals of the mighty nations simply because they are using them to meet their own agendas. Leaders of the Third World owe it to their people to show true leadership and bring their people out of the miseries that presently engulfs them.

As for the US and its political leaders who are controlled by global MNCs, transnational corporate, global financiers the tables need to turn on them. For far too long they have ruined the world, the planet and the people


 Shenali D Waduge SRI LANKA

Tamil civilian rapes in North Sri Lanka : 18 by Sri Lanka Armed Forces, what about 4000 by Indian Peace Keepers?

March 3rd, 2014

 Shenali D Waduge, Sri Lanka

 Garth Pritchard, a Canadian filmmaker who accompanied the forensic team to Kosovo said this was a massacre that never happened….I was standing there when the forensic teams were telling Louise Arbor there were no 200,000 bodies and she didn’t want to know”. Louis Arbor was the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, she was part of the ‘mass grave’ lie. Her successor is Navi Pillay and she is happy to continue the mass lies. Sri Lanka is the target and every effort is being taken to co-link rapes with the Sri Lankan military presence in the North but we are ready to take on the lies.

 To Western Governments and the UN and a handful of selected heads working in cohorts with the West’s imperial agenda, Sri Lanka’s problems revolve around ONLY Tamils or Muslims. Not a single issue suffered by the Sinhalese have ever gained any international attention. Presently, these heads are going to great lengths to showcase a link with rapes to the presence of the Sri Lankan military in order to use that as an example to push for an international demand to remove Sri Lankan troops from the North.

 If we are to address the question of rape directly, let us first look at some numbers and then draw conclusions based on these numbers.

 Between January 2007 to November 2013, 8528 rapes have taken place throughout Sri Lanka

 During war = January 2007 to May 2009

Post-war = May 2009 to November 2013

 Breaking this further into during war and post war the statistics reveal:

 Rape during war = 2816 (4055 accused)

Rape post war = 5712 (8174 accused)

 The immediate response would be to conclude that all these rapes refer to the North.

 However, in North Sri Lanka rape during and after war = 127 (during war) and 377 (post war) (total cases of 504). Other sexual offences = 6 (during war) / 84 (post war)

 In East Sri Lanka rape during and after war = 124 (during war) and 418 (post war) (total cases 542)

 The Western Province with a population of 5.8million, rape figures are 510 (during war) & 988 (post war) (total case of 1498)

 Yet, why is the emphasis always only on North Sri Lanka? The cases of rape are highest in the Western province with 18% while North Sri Lanka it is just 6%.

 Be that as it may given that the entire rape scenario is being used to discredit and prove links to rape in the North with military presence so as to generate enough international condemnation, we think that it is time to expose the lies before Sri Lanka ends up victims of West/UN mass lies.

 The North cases of 504 rapes and 90 sexual offences totals 594

Of these 594 cases 18 have been attributed to the Sri Lanka Armed Forces.

 The 18 accused from the Armed Forces have names/ their ages are known and full details of them are available with the Armed Forces. What needs to be said is the 18 cases of rape within a span of 7 years CANNOT constitute mass rape or showcase orders of rape by the military upon Tamil civilians as attempts are being made to prove.

 What about the 576 rapes (excluding the 18)? Were these not committed by Tamils upon Tamils?

 This next brings us to the subject of the Indian Peace Keeping Force arriving in Sri Lanka in July 1987 and greeted with garlands by the Tamil people. That honeymoon did not last for long as a series of incidents record the horrific 3 ½ year Indian barbarism in Sri Lanka upon the Tamil people whom Indian Prime Minister claims India wishes to treat with dignity and respect.

 Over 4000 cases of rape are recorded by none other than the LTTE themselves and with the recent appointment of the Presidential Commission on the missing there are Tamils now coming forward to lodge their complaints and Indian war crimes in Sri Lanka are also getting lodged.

 For Navi Pillay and the rest of the coterie of humanitarian organizations and their paid workers their statements and workshop propaganda are selective to say the least. Is there some silent understanding that Indian War crimes in particular to the period of Indian troops in Sri Lanka would be kept under the carpet? 

Why have none of these entities including the Human Rights head brought up the need to investigate Indian war crimes in Sri Lanka? The Jaffna hospital massacre of even Tamil doctors, unarmed too, the Velvetiturai massacre of unarmed civilians and 4000 rapes that even Human Rights Watch recorded at the time cannot have been isolated cases in just 3 ½ years.

 Will these ever be on the agenda of the UN head or its human rights head – we think not, like Louise Arbor insisted on mass graves in Yugoslavia, Navi Pillay insists of rape by Sri Lankan military and mass graves too… so these are now best practice tactics being recycled upon countries that are being targeted and the UN has a super blueprint to showcase the lies as truth.

 Nevertheless, we are not prepared to continue with the lies that have led to whole countries being devastated and ruined because officials of the UN were complicit in the crimes of the big power nations out to loot and plunder Third World again or take over nations in a bid to circle the emerging super powers who are a threat to their dominance.

 All that Sri Lanka needs to say is that we defeated terrorists, their cruelty and evil are known only by those who lived and suffered throughout Sri Lanka. LTTE prevailed throughout the island not just in the North. The people who suffered are not only Tamils, why is this continued insistence to portray Tamils as the only victims. In terms of reciprocity, the Sinhalese have extended enough olive branches bringing many legislative changes that no other nation with just 10% of a minority population would be given. How many of the Tamils have openly thanked and wished to start life afresh, how many Arun Thambimuttu’s are there amongst the Tamils who openly canvasses for a country that needs to move on and allow time to heal without wishing to go behind bogus Truth Commissions that are really out to take over the domestic mechanisms under the UN so that the powerful nations can through the UN puppets run the world.

 Why would the UN conveniently omit any references to India’s crimes in Sri Lanka. 18 cases of rape against 4000 (which the LTTE has documented) are proof that a systematic crime was committed in Sri Lanka. Why is the Chief Minister of the North and the TNA not bringing up the need to investigate these if as they say they are so concerned about the Tamils?

Shenali D Waduge

Sri Lanka defended Japan at the Peace Treaty of San Francisco – its Japan’s turn to reciprocate

March 3rd, 2014

Shenali D Waduge

 On 8th September 1951, 51 nations gathered at the War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco to officially end World War 2 and to formally end Japan’s position as an imperial power, and to allocate compensation to Allied civilians and former prisoners of war who had suffered Japanese war crimes. Powerful nations objected to Japan being set up as a US military base and coercing Japan’s to align to the West. India did not even attend the conference. Japan, would recall that it was little Sri Lanka who defended Japan before all the nations present and went a step forward by declaring that Sri Lanka would not accept any reparations from Japan as that would affect Japan’s economy. In Japan’s darkest hour and when Japan needed a friend, Sri Lanka came forward in 1951 without strings attached. Japan, with its history, ancient culture and Buddhist identity must realize the predicament Sri Lanka is in to come to Sri Lanka’s defence as Sri Lanka did when Japan needed support.

Sri Lanka was represented by J R Jayawardena as Finance Minister. His speech received resounding applause and was extensively quoted and appreciated. Excerpts from that speech are given below:

it was at the Colombo Conference of Commonwealth Foreign Ministers held in January, 1950, that for the first time the case for a completely independent Japan was proposed and considered. The Colombo Conference considered Japan not as an isolated case, but as part of the region known as South and Southeast Asia, containing a large proportion of the world’s wealth and population, and consisting of countries which have only recently regained their freedom, whose people were still suffering as a result of centuries of neglect. Two ideas emerged from that Conference – one, that of an independent Japan, and the other, the necessity for the economic and social development of the peoples of South and South-east Asia, to ensure which, what is now known as the Colombo Plan was launched……. The treaty now before us is the result of those consultations and negotiations. It represents some of the views that my Government had…………… The main idea that animated the Asian countries, Ceylon, India and Pakistan, in their attitude to Japan was that Japan should be free. …… Should reparations be exacted from Japan? If so, the amount. How is Japan to defend herself until she organizes her own defence?………… We feel that the allied matters I mentioned earlier are not insoluble if Japan is free, that they are insoluble if Japan is not free……

Why is it that the peoples of Asia are anxious that Japan should be free ? It is because of our age-long connections with her, and because of the high regard the subject peoples of Asia have for Japan when she alone, among the Asian nations, was strong and free and we looked up to her as a guardian and friend……. We in Ceylon were fortunate that we were not invaded, but the damage caused by air raids, by the stationing of enormous armies under the South-East Asian Command, and by the slaughter-tapping of one of our main commodities, rubber, when we were the only producers of natural rubber for the Allies, entitle us to ask th1at the damage so caused should be repaired. We do not intend to do so, for we believe in the words of the Great Teacher whose message has ennobled the lives of countless millions in Asia, that (hatred ceases not by hatred, but by love’. It is the message of the Buddha, the Great Teacher, the Founder of Buddhism, which spread a wave of humanism through South Asia, Burma, Laos, Cambodia, Siam, Indonesia and Ceylon, and also northwards through the Himalayas into Tibet, China, and finally, Japan, which bound us together for hundreds of years with a common culture and heritage. This common culture still exists, as I found on my visit to Japan last week on my way to attend this Conference; and from the leaders of Japan, Ministers of State as well as private citizens, from their priests in the temples, I gathered the impression that the common people of Japan are still influenced by the shadow of that Great Teacher of peace, and wish to follow it. We must give them that opportunity…this treaty proposes to return to Japan sovereignty, equality and dignity, and we cannot do so if we give them with qualifications. The purpose of the treaty then is to make Japan free, to impose no restrictions on Japan’s recovery, to see to it that she organizes her own military defence against external aggression, and internal subversion, and that until she does so, she invites the aid of a friendly power to protect her, and that no reparations be exacted from her that harm her economy.

This treaty is as magnanimous as it is just to a defeated foe.
We extend to Japan a hand of friendship, and trust that with the closing of this chapter in the history of man, the last page of which we write today, and with the beginning of the new one, the first page of which we dictate tomorrow, her people and ours may march together to enjoy the full dignity of human life in peace and prosperity.”

This speech is relevant for many reasons. Over 63 years has passed since the speech and today Sri Lanka finds itself in need of global friends sincere enough to stand by the nation as selective, biased and unjust accusations are being continuously hurled upon Sri Lanka for defeating an internationally proscribed terrorist movement.

Sri Lanka’s accomplishment in militarily eliminating a terrorist movement is unparalleled and with it a humanitarian rescue operation saved 300,000 Tamil people. A post-conflict mechanism was indigenously developed. In less than 4 years 97% of these displaced people are now living in new homes when the majority of them were originally living in huts. Areas of the North that had been under LTTE defacto rule despite the presence of foreign organizations had not even seen a proper road, today 3billion investment in developing the North has given a new lease of life to the people and areas that never had electricity in 3 decades are now enjoying light. People see the change. Politicians don’t because politicians need issues to rally people around them. Japan’s representative Akashi has first hand information having been very much part of numerous failed peace/cease fire negotiations. He is well aware of life during LTTE and now with people freely traveling throughout the country without having to pay LTTE taxes.

Sri Lanka objected to Japan being given ‘qualifications’ for its freedom. Our own homegrown mechanisms that have proven successful in just 4 years have not satisfied a handful of foreign nations for they seek to remote control Sri Lanka from foreign shores. As a sovereign and independent nation, it is Sri Lanka’s right to charter its own destiny as proved by the scale of development and change people are experiencing. People are getting on with their lives. No people with a past wish to have these re-exposed on public domain. Countless Truth Commissions have been useless as their failures have been documented. Sri Lanka sees no reason in polarizing communities once again. The nations and people calling for Truth Commissions have never accounted for their calculated sins and these include blatant lies and distortion of truth. The scores of ex-combatants are moving on with their lives. They and their families need room to heal. They need time and space and they do not need to be brought to the dock to tell the world what they did. We know what they did was wrong and they know too and so long as they have given assurance that they would not repeat those wrongs Sri Lanka’s compassionate society are willing to allow them to be very much part of our society.

Therefore, the world must understand that Sri Lanka needs room to heal. We do not need nations and their representatives who did nothing to end 3 decades of terror to now come to the scene flagging this solution and that solution. We formulated our own plan and we must be given room to follow that through. Nations who have been subjugated as Japan and Germany through various treaties need to realize the importance of allowing room to heal.

We are hurt that foreign delegates enjoy our hospitality and view the visible changes all around Sri Lanka but issue statements in total denial of their conscience having met handful of politicians in the pocket of foreign domination or others who never even set a foot in the North when LTTE prevailed and now pretend to be the guardians of the Tamil people and hire people to showcase their importance. There are handful of others who are employed by foreign concerns and naturally they too are paid to flag versions that are anti-national. It is in the backdrop of these realities that nations like Japan must view Sri Lanka’s current disposition.

Japan-Sri Lanka ties are long and cannot be forgotten. Japan ‘s ties to Allied Powers may impede its relationship with Sri Lanka but Japan may like to recall that Sri Lanka spoke independently in favor of Japan in 1951 and numerous other instances as well.

Sri Lanka is facing a dark hour and it is good for Japan to look at the long ties between the two nations and help Sri Lanka, similar to the unconditional gesture Sri Lanka made to Japan many moons ago.

Sri Lanka: UN’s Navi Pillay Fails To Dispel Charges Of Bias

March 3rd, 2014

By Kalinga Seneviratne | IDN-InDepth NewsAnalysis

SINGAPORE (IDN) – Giving a press conference at the end of seven-day visit to Sri Lanka, United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) head Navi Pillay, a South African, said that she was highly offended by comments in the Sri Lankan media accusing her of bias because of her Indian Tamil ethnicity.

Some media, ministers, bloggers and various propagandists in Sri Lanka have, for several years now, on the basis of my Indian Tamil heritage, described me as a tool of the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam). They have claimed I was in their pay, the ‘Tamil Tigress in the UN’. This is not only wildly incorrect, it is deeply offensive,” said Pillay at the beginning of the press conference on August 31, 2013.

In the same vein, she added, the LTTE was a murderous organization that committed numerous crimes and destroyed many lives . . . those in the diaspora who continue to revere the memory of the LTTE must recognize that there should be no place for the glorification of such a ruthless organization”.

These comments have not stopped the Sri Lankan media and the blogosphere continuing their attacks on the perceived bias of both UNHRC and its head for allegedly overstepping her mandate to attack the Sri Lankan government from its own soil.

In a hard-hitting editorial, the government-owned Daily News the day after she left Sri Lanka, said that the UN High Commissioner’s prejudices have long been clear, but they have never been clearer than after her recent visit to this country”.

The editorial went on to argue that the reaction at the end of her tour was expected and in fact, President Mahinda Rajapakse himself predicted it the day before. He told her at Temple Trees (President’s official residence) that the people of this country think that her report to the UN at the end of her tour of duty will reflect her prejudice,” the paper disclosed.

Welcoming her comments on the ruthlessness of the LTTE, the Daily News said: “We may very well be able take her at her word that she has no truck with the Tamil Tigers, but if anybody on the streets gets that impression she has only herself to blame for it.” It pointed out that without informing the government in advance she had tried to lay a wreath in Nandikadal, the location of the final battle in which the LTTE was annihilated. The army officials on the location stopped her from doing it.

During her meeting with President Rajaakse, Pillay was reported to have told him that it was good she was able to come to see the developments in the country and it was very visible” to her that the government has invested a lot in reconstruction work in the North.

Yet, the pro-LTTE TamilNet said that according to informed sources in Jaffna when the Northern Province Governor Major General (retd) G.A. Chandrasiri was showcasing the development work in the area, she told him that she was more interested in witnessing what had been achieved on the human rights front. She also questioned whether the people on the ground had been consulted in designing the ‘development’ projects that were being displayed to her.

‘Double standards’

In addition to her perceived ethnic Tamil bias, a lot of criticism in the Sri Lankan media and websites has focused on what are considered as her double standards in demanding an independent  war crimes investigation on the final days of the war against the LTTE in Sri Lanka, while being silent on U.S. and NATO actions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and currently in Syria.

Writing in LankaWeb, veteran journalist  H.L.D Mahindapala argued that Pillay has worked hand in glove with the European Union to accuse Sri Lanka of war crimes.  As early as May 2009 she has fired a broadside with regards to human rights violation which ran on parallel lines to the EU resolution tabled at UNHRC,” he pointed out.

On what criteria did she confine her condemnation of Sri Lanka to the last five months of war, leaving out selectively 32 years and 7 months of the longest war in Asia in which the Tamil Tiger terrorists used every conceivable weapons of war, including chemical warfare?” asked Mahindapala.

The independent Island newspaper reported that the Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapakse has told Pillay that the United States had no moral right to move a resolution targeting Sri Lanka at the UNHRC.  He has questioned her silence and argued that it reflected the difficulties experienced by the UNHRC in dealing with atrocities committed by U.S.-led Western powers.

When Pillay was asked this question at the press conference, she merely said that UNHRC release a report on every country each year and last year the U.S. had to respond to 19 queries. But, she avoided saying anything more about these queries or why she has not articulated it publicly as she has done with Sri Lanka.

The bottom line was that Mrs Pillay would remain as UN rights chief as long as she didn’t antagonise the U.S.,” Defense Secretary told the Island.

Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister Prof G.L Peiris has reiterated during a meeting with Pillay in Colombo that it is important to have an objective approach and extend equal treatment to all countries when fulfilling the assigned mandate of the UNHRC. The Minister added that Sri Lanka accepts constructive and justified criticism, but resents vicious and baseless positions, which are incessantly repeated.

He had explained to her the difficulties encountered in identifying the perpetrators of human rights violations due to the conditions prevailing at the time of incidence, with regard to a number of cases UNHRC has raised that occurred during the war. He drew a parallel with the case of the assassination of the former Foreign Minister late Lakshman Kadirgamar (by the LTTE), where conviction has not been possible due to the lack of evidence. In cases of missing persons, he outlined the difficulties in identifying the missing due to instances involving persons having migrated to other countries holding multiple identities, and those host governments not divulging their details.

It was indicated to UNHRC head that the repeated use of baseless and arbitrary figures in respect of disappearances, eventually lends authenticity in the face of the massive propaganda that is being carried out against the Government of Sri Lanka. Regarding comments made by the High Commissioner on the PTA (Prevention of Terrorism Act), the Minister stated that some of the countries that criticize, have provisions in their domestic legislation far beyond those of the Sri Lankan PTA.

He advised Pillay to look at the human rights situation in Sri Lanka from a more broader perspective and pointed out the impressive development indicators in the country since the war ended in 2009. He gave her information on the enormous amount of resources being channeled to the North, which has resulted in a 27% growth rate in that region, as against corresponding national figure of 7%. In this context, Minister had also informed her that there are 225 bank branches and 76 finance and leasing companies that have been established in the Northern Province since 2009.

Pillay is due to make a report to the next UNHRC sessions in October on Sri Lanka, but, many commentators in Colombo tend to believe that it will not be fair to the country.

Courtesy: IDN-InDepthNews 

For more

Re: Article titled ‘Diplomats fear Australia will wreck UN probe into Sri Lankan war crimes

March 3rd, 2014

Mahinda Gunasekera Tambrook Drive Agincourt, Ontario, Canada

February 6, 2014

 By E-mail


Mr. Scott Reid, MP

Member for Lanark- Frontenac-Lennox  and Addington

Chair of the Sub-Committee on  International Human Rights

Of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Int’l Dev.

House of Commons



Dear Mr. Scott Reid,

Resumed Hearings on the Human Rights situation in Sri Lanka : Nov 7 to Dec 10,2013

Further to my earlier communications, I have pleasure in forwarding an article published in the Colombo Telegraph on February 14, 2014, written under the pen name of ‘Mango’, which gives a detailed analysis of the various guesstimates and  official counts of war related deaths said to have occurred during the period from January 1 to May 18, 2009 in the military action taken by Sri Lanka against the Tamil Tiger terrorists.  In the analysis undertaken by the writer, he has done a comparison of the numbers deemed killed (KIA) and others wounded in action (WIA), to show the validity or absurdity of some of the figures claimed by various rights groups, UNSG’s Panel, Gordon Weiss, Frances Harrison, Channel 4, and the Government of Sri Lanka’s census outcome of 2012.

In this regard, I have pointed out in my response to Frances Harrison’s presentation submitted on February 6, 2014, that the count taken by the UN Resident Representative’s office in Colombo in the amount of 7,721 deaths, the Sri Lanka census count of 7,432 and that announced by the Tamil Tiger’s propaganda arm called the Tamilnet of 7,398 vary by a few hundred from each other.  None of these three have distinguished between combatant and civilian deaths leaving one to conclude that these numbers include combatants killed in action as well.  Nearly every report including that of the UNSG’s POE said that the Tamil Tigers blurred the ranks of combatants and civilians as many combatants did battle in civilian attire which is even confirmed by some
of the enclosed photos captured from the LTTE.  The number of 40,000 and more civilian deaths has no basis whatsoever to support this guesstimate which puts the UNSG’s POE report into serious doubt, Gordon Weiss’ padding of the numbers to sell his book titled ‘The Cage’ to the million strong Tamil diaspora, and Frances Harrison’s hallucinations where she is “still Counting The Dead’ into the realm of malicious distortion.

The document sent in attachment is one authored by Padraig Colman and Prof. Michael Roberts of Adelaide, Australia on the subject :

The fog of war” envelopes the last phase of Eelam War IV 

They have mentioned that most the western journalists covering the armed conflict in Sri Lanka were partial to the Tamil Tigers and failed to report what was taking place and instead were being led by Tiger propaganda and putting their spin on the stories.  Well known AP reporter Ravi Nessman had claimed that it was a ‘War without Winesses’,  whereas he is himself seen being taken to the battlefront as confirmed by the pictures carried in the article.  Jeremy Page of the UK Times had reported that 1,400 of the rescued Tamil IDPs were dying each week in the transit camps in Vavunia where they were being taken care of pending demining over 6,200 sq. km. (approx. 1/10 of the island’s total land area) which had been contaminated with landmines and IEDs planted by the LTTE and putting in place necessary infrastructure prior to their being resettled.  This was a fabrication by Page to demonize Sri Lanka and mislead his readers.  They have commented on the UNSG’s POE report, Channel 4 coverage and many more, and described the work of the western media as ‘Churnalism’.
Please read and get an idea of the harm done to Sri Lanka’s image by the western media who obviously came with preconceived notions fed to them by the well funded Tamil Tiger propaganda wing, which Sri Lanka is finding great difficulty in correcting as little or no coverage is given to Sri Lanka’s story and views.

Yours sincerely,

Mashinda Gunasekera

Encl.  (1) Article annexed: Sri Lanka’s War In Its Last Phase: Where WIA Figures Defeat The Gross KIA Estimates
(2) Article sent in attachment : The “fog of war” envelopes the last phase of Eelam War IV

Sri Lanka’s War In Its Last Phase: Where WIA Figures Defeat The Gross KIA Estimates

February 14, 2014 | Filed under: Colombo Telegraph,Opinion | Posted by: COLOMBO_TELEGRAPH

By Mango -

Millions of words have now been written about the numbers of Tamil civilians killed during Sri Lanka’s victory over the Tamil Tigers in May 2009; probably more words than the millions of bullets fired during the war. But something didn’t ring true.

Missing from this civilian casualty toll inflation is any mention of an immutable fact of warfare: the ratio of dead to wounded. This was first analysed in a ground-breaking study in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in 1999, which examined casualty ratios in wars from 1940 to 1988. The study showed that the number of people wounded is at least twice the number killed and may be 13 times as high” depending on the conflict type, weapons used and other factors.

Applying this ratio to Sri Lanka’s civilian casualty numbers during the last stages of Eelam War 4 shows a truly appalling misuse of civilian casualty numbers by international humanitarians, whose jaundiced view on Sri Lanka’s victory has led them to disregard basic mathematics, statistics, facts and logic.

Counting the Dead and Ignoring the Wounded

The number of wounded vary from 18,479 to 440,037. Odd.


Casualty Chart, KIA to WIA including Sri Lanka Army’s own casualty data © The Carthaginian Solution 2013

Spot the Glaring Error 


KIA to WIA at 1:3 ratio with data shown by release date order, from 2009 to 2013. © The Carthaginian Solution 2013

The United Nations in Sri Lanka’s Casualty Numbers

In 2009, the UN’s Crisis Operations Group” in Sri Lanka first established the numbers of Tamil civilian casualties with any degree of authority and confidence. They estimated 7,721 killed and 18,479 wounded arriving at a killed to wounded ratio of 1:3. This is a low ratio and is in line with the fact that wounded civilians in the combat zone did not have quick access to high quality medical facilities.

This screenshot shows an unarmed civilian work group lead by an armed, uniformed LTTE cadre – May 2009

The Darusman Report’s Casualty Numbers

This report’s authors gave credence to the 40,000 dead civilians meme in a masterful display of officialese stating, A number of credible sources have estimated that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths. …. but multiple sources of information indicate that a range of up to 40,000 civilian deaths cannot be ruled out at this stage.” Oddly, none of the Committee’s highly qualified members noted the discrepancy between the number of dead civilians and the lack of correspondingly (high) number of wounded survivors.

Gordon Weiss’s Casualty Numbers

In his book The Cage” Gordon Weiss (ex-Colombo based UN staffer), upped the ante by raising the civilian dead total to between 10,000 and 40,000. Applying a conservative ratio of 1:3 (dead to wounded), we arrive at wounded totals ranging from 30,000 to 120,000. Weiss merely noted in passing that the UN counted about 20,000 wounded Tamil civilians, and completely ignored the stunning implication this has on his inflated civilian deaths numbers.

Frances Harrison’s Casualty Numbers

Frances Harrison (ex-Sri Lanka based BBC hack and ex-Amnesty International staffer) raised the civilian dead total even higher ranging from 26,000 to 146,679. Assuming a ratio of 1:3 (dead to wounded), we arrive at wounded totals ranging from 78,000 to 440,037. Here things start getting slightly insane as there were only 330,000+ civilians held hostage in the No Fire Zone.


Civilian helper helping to camouflage a LTTE personnel carrier, overseen by an armed LTTE cadre dressed in civilian clothes

Using Harrison’s upper estimate of 146,679 ‘civilians’ dying and thus producing 440,037 wounded gives a total 586,716 people killed and wounded. This is almost double the number of civilians thought to be in the No Fire Zone area at the time.

Sri Lanka Army’s own Casualty Numbers

The Security Forces admitted 5,285 combat deaths (KIA) and 28,189 wounded (WIA). This gives a dead to wounded ratio of 1:5, which is broadly in line with the BMJ study. Troops had access to better medical care than the wounded civilians, thus explaining the 1:5 ratio, when compared to the 1:3 ratio applicable to civilian wounded. Comparing this ratio to a well-equipped Western force like the US Army in Iraq, which by 2012 reported 4,487 US soldiers killed and 32,223 wounded since in 2003, produced a dead/wounded ratio of 1:7.

How Do You Define A Civilian?

There were at least three types of civilians caught up in combat in the No Fire Zone. LTTE cadres (in uniform and in civilian clothes), semi-trained LTTE auxillary forces and press-ganged civilians who carried out military duties for the LTTE.  When killed in action, all could (and would be) counted as civilian casualties. In the LTTE’s glory days, cadres killed in action were often stripped of their uniforms and dressed in civilian attire to increase the ‘dead civilian’ count. But it’s doubtful if the LTTE had time for such niceties as they fought to stave off annihilation, in May 2009.


LTTE cadres dressed in civilian clothes firing a ZU-23 heavy machine gun

This captured LTTE combat video (above) from May 2009 shows all three categories of civilians in action in the No Fire Zone”. Screenshots taken from the video clearly show the various types of civilians at work, helping to shore up the LTTE’s defensive line.

So How Many Civilians Were Killed?

The best guesstimate predicts between 10,000 to 15,000 dead (including LTTE cadres), which ties in with the UN’s casualty total of 15,000 to 20,000 wounded civilians.

Show Me the Money… er…. the Wounded

It’s entirely possible that over 146,679 Tamil civilians were killed in Eelam War 4. But for that to be true, (and allowing for the large margin of error evident in anything to do with casualty numbers in Eelam War 4), those who make that claim have to conjure up at least another 440,037 wounded Tamil civilians, who – so far – are proving difficult to find and are conspicuous by their absence.

Source data notes:

(1) The UN’s Country Group in Sri Lanka established a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 wounded.” International Crisis Group.

(2) The United Nations Country Team is one source of information; in a document that was never released publicly, it estimated a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 up to 13 May 2009, after which it became too difficult to count.” [paragraph 134, Darusman Report]

(3) late June, when all civilians were inside the [post-war IDP] camps, a collection of aid agencies had made a preliminary calculation of 15,000-20,000 wounded civilians”. p. 321, The Cage”, Gordon Weiss

I believe that between 10,000 and 40,000 [deaths] is a reasonable estimate. I think most likely it’s somewhere between 30,000 to 40,000 [deaths] , Gordon Weiss on Australian TV & interviews

(4) ..anywhere from 26,000 to 146,679 people unaccounted for, presumed dead.” p.238, Frances Harrison, Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War”

(5) Sri Lanka Government’s post-war census report recorded that about 7,400 people died of undefined or other” causes during the months leading up to the end of the war. Source:

(6) from July 2006 (Mavil Aru) to May 2009 (Nanthi Kadal) 5275 were KIA, 28,189 were WIA, and 140 were MIA. This is for the whole operation…. almost one-fourth of the Army losses that occurred during the entire two and a half year operation were sustained in the final stages. My note: KIA and MIA have been combined as generally, those missing in action are presumed dead. Source:

External Affairs Minister Peiris to address HRC High Level Segment on Wednesday

March 3rd, 2014

Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka Geneva

 Minister of External Affairs, Prof. G.L. Peiris who leads the Sri Lanka delegation to the 25th Session of the Human Rights Council (HRC) arrives in Geneva on Tuesday (4 Match 2014), and is  scheduled to deliver the Sri Lanka National Statement at  the High Level Segment of the HRC on the morning of Wednesday.

 The 3 day High Level Segment began today with statements by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, President of UN General Assembly John W. Ashe, President of Human Rights Council Baudelaire Ndong Ella, High Commissioner for Human Rights Ms. Navi Pillay, and the President of the Swiss Federation Didier Burkhalter. Foreign Ministers/Ministerial level heads of delegations participating in the Session will continue to address the meeting over the next 2 days.

 As is customary for leaders of the delegations, Minister Peiris will meet High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms. Navaneetham Pillay on Thursday, 6 March 2014. He will also consult with Like Minded Countries, particularly on matters relating to Sri Lanka that are scheduled to come up during the present Session.  On the side-lines of the High Level Segment of the HRC, Minister Peiris will be also meeting with heads of delegations of member states. The report by the High Commissioner on Sri Lanka is scheduled to be presented on 26 March 2014.

 Monitoring MP of the Ministry of External Affairs Sajin de Vass Gunawardena is already in Geneva to participate in the High Level Segment, and is being joined by Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha and senior staff of the Mission, Senior Assistant Secretary to the President Chandima Wickramasinghe and the Assistant Director/West Division and Counter Terrorism Unit of the MEA Fathuma Mafusa.

 Leader of the House and Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Management Nimal Siripala de Silva, and Minister of Plantation Industries Mahinda Samarsinghe, who will be in Geneva to participate in the 130th Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU) Assembly and related meetings, will join the Sri Lanka delegation from 15-21 and 9 -21 March, respectively, in briefing regional groups of member countries to the UN in Geneva on developments relating to Sri Lanka.

Senior officials, Additional Solicitors General Jayantha Jayasuriya and W.J. Shavindra Fernando, Deputy Solicitors General A.H.M.D. Nawaz and A. Nerin R. Pulle, Minister in the Sri Lanka Mission in Qatar Sithara Azard Khan, Senior Assistant Secretary to the Ministry of Defense Shashikala Premawardhane, will join the delegation during the HRC’s different segments, which will run through 28 March 2014.



Faultlines in Navi Pillay’s report to UNHRC

March 3rd, 2014

H.L. D. Mahindapala

 The anti-Sri Lankan resolution sponsored USA, UK and India – the three prime movers — will rely essentially on the report presented by Navy Pillay, the High Commissioner of UNHRC. It is likely that other nations too will be influenced by it.  In the following analysis addressed to Ms. Pillay, the former Editor of The Observer, H. L. D. Mahindapala, exposes the failure of Ms. Pillay to deal with the central issues fairly and comprehensively.  It also exposes the partisan approach of Ms. Pillay which accuses only Sri Lanka and not the violations  of human  rights by India, one  of the prime movers of the anti-Sri Lankan resolution.

 Mahindapala told Ceylon Today that there isn’t a sari or a turban big enough to hide India’s hypocrisy. He added:  Navi  Pillay too is playing an unacceptable role in focusing disproportionately on Sri Lanka. She is very quick to pick on Mahinda Rajapaksa from little Lanka but not Manmohan Singh or Narendra Modi of Himalayan India. If Modi becomes the next prime minister of India will she take on Modi for massacreing the Muslims of Gujarat, Modi’s state?”

 Here’s the full text of Mahindapala’s letter addressed to Navi  Pillay:

 Ms. Navi Pillay

High Commissioner for Human Rights



 Dear Madam,

                                        Comments on the report of the UN High Commissioner,  Ms. Navi Pillay. titled Promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka

 I read with interest your report titled Promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka presented to the twenty-fifth session of Human Rights Council in Geneva (February 24, 2014). 

I welcome the detailed report and I wish to  add that I agree with some of the critical parts which are accurate. 

In particular I wish to state that I agree with a central  allegation enunciated in your report. You state: The Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) has, however, failed to ensure independent and credible investigation into the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law.” This judgmental statement targeting Sri Lanka comes from the summary of your report. If there is one criterion by which the validity, morality and the legality of your report can be judged it is in this critical standard which you have stated with clarity.  I wish to underscore the phrase the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law”. I shall deal with this aspect of the past” as I go along. 

 I wish also to state that the title which broadly covers the promotion of reconciliation and accountability without setting a time limit is also quite appropriate. I take it to mean that reconciliation and accountability” go hand in hand and a comprehensive accountability of the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law” is a sine qua non for reconciliation.

 I consider your statement – namely, The Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) has, however, failed to ensure independent and credible investigation into the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law” – as  a critical standard laid  down by you to map the future of course of action in Sri Lanka. The prime movers of this anti-Sri Lankan resolution – i.e., USA, UK and India – too will be influenced essentially by the contents and the standards laid down in your report. This makes it clear that the three prime movers and you work in tandem to enforce the common political objectives pursued collectively in the name of achieving justice and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. In other words, your report has laid down the ground work for the three prime movers to pursue their objective of imposing an independent international inquiry” into the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law”.

 As the chief guardian of human rights I believe that this standard is to be applied universally without exception. I also believe that the past” referred to in your report is not confined to an arbitrary cut-off date which would automatically exonerate some violators of international humanitarian and human rights law who intervened militarily to combat the Tamil Tiger terrorists. So it is imperative that the past” referred to you in the report should be defined unequivocally. This is also necessary because there seems to be a conflict of opinion on this issue between the GOSL and the prime movers of the resolution and, of course, UNHRC – i.e., while the GOSL rejects the arbitrary cut-off date referred in the UNHRC resolution the prime movers are determined to confine their independent international inquiry” only to the last few months. In the interests of peace, reconciliation and accountability it is best to clarify whether there should be a cut-off date to determine the past” or not.

 A realistic view of  the relevant, historical past should begin from May 14, 1976 when the  Tamil leadership, assembled in Vadukoddai, declared war against the nation, leading  to crimes against peace and violations  of human rights. It is classified as the longest running war in Asia because the  declaration of war in Vadukoddai by the Tamil leadership on May 14, 1976 unleashed Tamil violence which ended after 33years on May 18, 2009. So the past consists of the 33 years (give or take a few days) and any independent and credible investigation into the past violations must cover the entire 33 years without exception to achieve the goals of (1)  justice for all victims of the war; (2) accountability that can hold all those responsible for the violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in the 33-year-old war and (3) achieving comprehensive reconciliation and peace. Anything shorter than the 33 years would amount to a distortion of the meaning of the word past” as it chops off the body and head of the past, leaving only the tail end – and that too the hairy bits of the tail end. Your report, quite rightly, is focused on the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law” which can mean by any rational deduction the entire 33 years.

 However, despite your statement in the summary quoted above,  it is somewhat disconcerting to note that your report takes a very limited and unrealistic view of the past. It does not go beyond the last stages of war which, at the most, does not stretch beyond the last eight months – i.e., from September 2008 to May 2009 as seen in various other reports.

 You would agree that the time-frame in your report has failed to ensure independent and credible investigation into the past” beyond this limited period. I wish to argue that it would be impossible to ensure independent and credible investigation into the past” if the past” is arbitrarily limited to just a few months in the last stages. Since the past of this longest running war in Asia goes back to 33 years any credible or independent report must necessarily cover the entire period and not confine itself to an arbitrary cut-off date that cannot be justified by any rational yardstick. .

 To begin with, this limited time-frame is unfair by all  the victims of this futile war. If, as implied in your report, the aim is to get justice for the victims of the war then you automatically cut off the claims and concerns of the other victims who suffered during the previous 32 years and four months, by limiting the investigations to the last few months. The imbalance in this selective methodology will not contribute to either restore justice to all victims or help to advance reconciliation as the direct and immediate  impact of this move leads to exonerating key military actors who had violated international humanitarian and  human rights law of any responsibility or accountability. Besides, there is no precedent to judge a long-drawn war only by the last stage. If the main purpose of the resolution initiated by the three prime movers is to bring  to book those responsible for violations of international humanitarian and human rights law then natural justice demands that all those  who violated the rules of engagement in the war in the past”, which goes as far back as 33 years, should be held accountable. But if the period of investigation is confined to the last stage then it would automatically exonerate some of the guilty actors whose political and military interventions – not to mention excesses –  led to serious violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law in the preceding 32 years and four months.

 Consider, for instance, how this applies to the 33-year-old war in Sri Lanka. The facts of the case are simple: Two militaries fought the Tamil Tiger terrorists: 1. the Sri Lankan forces and 2. the Indian forces. There is evidence to conclude that , both forces violated human rights law in combatting the deadliest terrorist outfit of the world” (FBI).  However, the past”, as defined in your report, includes only the last phase in which the GOSL crushed the Tamil Tiger terrorists and not the Indian Government forces which fought the Tamil Tigers fiercely between 1987 – 1990, three years in all. This is the fundamental flaw in your report. The selected time-frame targets only GOSL and not the Indian forces. The massive campaign of INGOs, international media, Tamil Diaspora and Western Foreign Offices too have taken this narrow view of focusing only on the last phase as if the previous years were fought by India, for instance, with roses without thorns.

 What is needed right now is to restore a balance to this one-sided view.

 This requires a critical questioning primarily of the validity of the arbitrary time-frame:

  1. 1.     Can the Commissioner of Human Rights  ensure independent and credible investigation into the past violations of the international humanitarian  and human rights law” if the focus is only on the last sector of the past?
  2. 2.     Can the Commissioner of Human Rights provide a rational explanation as to why the Indian atrocities committed during its military intervention in Sri Lanka ( 1987 – 1990) are excluded and why only the Sri Lankan military actions are included in the proposed independent investigations? 
  3. 3.     Can the Commissioner of Human Rights serving the global citizenry, without fear of favour, act selectively to target only one set of violations of human rights and not the other? Is this a deliberate strategy adopted by the High Commissioner, acting  jointly with the prime movers of the anti-Sri Lankan resolution, USA, UK and India, to divert attention from the documented role of India in violating international humanitarian and human right law in order to target only Sri Lanka?
  4. 4.     What moral or  legal rights has the High Commissioner to exclude the Indian forces in any independent and credible inquiry when they were the first foreign military interventionists who marched into Sri Lanka to defang and tame the Tamil Tiger terrorists – the very terrorist forces who were initially trained, financed and directed by India’s RAW (the equivalent of CIA) and exported to destabilize Sri Lanka? The IPKF operated from 1987 to 1990 on Sri Lankan soil. Their record of massacres, plunder, rape and other violations of international humanitarian and human rights law is well documented by I/NGOs and by Indian and Tamil eye-witnesses.  
  5. 5.     Shocked by the horrors of the Indian atrocities in Sri Lanka, the former Defence Minister, George Fernandez, condemned it as India’s Vietnam” and also as India’s My Lai.”
  6. 6.     The irony is that India, a violator of international humanitarian and human rights law on Sri Lankan territory, is now posing as a defender of humanitarian and human rights law pointing an accusing finger at Sri Lanka. How genuine is India’s  concern for human rights when she has had no compunction in violating human rights in Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Bangladesh, not to mention its own territory? For instance, Mr.  Narendra Modi,  the prime ministerial candidate in the coming election, was denied a visa by USA, one of the movers of the UNHRC Resolution, for his role in the massacre of Muslims in his  state of Gujarat. So why should India be exonerated when her war crimes on Sri Lankan soil are rated on the same level as that of My Lai in Vietnam by its own Defence Minister?
  7. 7.     Besides, neither the Indian Army nor the Indian government has held any inquiry into the criminal activities of its forces on Sri Lankan territory. Here’s what the Head of the Intelligence Unit of the Indian forces in Sri Lanka, Col. R. Hariharan, said recently on this issue: He said: There are a few issues involved in analyzing 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 levelled. 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). Needless to say, that this is a damning statement of India’s role in Sri Lanka by its own Chief of Intelligence Officer. Doesn’t natural justice demand that India should first hold its own impartial inquiries before pointing an accusing finger at Sri Lanka? Why doesn’t India, the super power  of the SAARC region, set the example for the others like Sri Lanka to follow? (Please see attached  document revealing Indian atrocities in Sri Lanka.)
  8. 8.     Col. Hariharan’s statement cited above is by far the most authoritative eye-witness account of the atrocities committed by the Indian forces. It is more than an eye-witness account. It is an official condemnation delivered by the highest ranking Intelligence Officer of the IPKF who was in Sri Lanka between 1987 — 1990. In the light of the available evidence can the High Commissioner for UNHRC selectively brush aside the authoritative accounts of the Indian war crimes and focus only on the Sri Lankan forces? If so on what grounds?
  9. 9.     If the Army leadership and Government (of India) failed to institute transparent investigations to get at the truth and disprove them or punish the culprits” should not the international community and the Human Rights Commissioner move without any further delay a resolution to hold an independent and credible investigations into the atrocities committed by the Indian Forces?
  10. 10.                        In the light of the evidence staring in the face of UNHRC can the delegates vote only for an independent investigation into the actions of the Sri Lankan forces in the last phase, or should the Council members deal with the violations of international humanitarian and human rights law comprehensively, going into the past” that run into 33 years?
  11. 11.                        The war ended on May 18, 2009. On May 26, 2009 the UN High Commissioner addressed the UNHRC demanding action against the Sri Lanka. As shown in the evidence cited above, India committed violations of international humanitarian and human rights law 25 years ago. Why has the High Commissioner who moved swiftly within eight days against Sri Lanka failed to take up the issue of Indian  atrocities committed on Sri Lankan soil  even after 25 years? Or is justice at the UNHRC something like kissing that goes by favour?
  12. 12.                        Will UNHRC, acting on the available evidence, withdraw the resolution against Sri Lanka and present a more comprehensive one which would include the atrocities committed by the Indian forces too?
  13. 13.                        The High Commissioner accuses the GOSL of not having the political will” to achieve truth and justice. The current Presidential Commission in Sri Lanka inquiring into abduction and disappearances from June 10th, 1990 to May 2009 have reported that witnesses are coming forward ready to give evidence on the atrocities committed by the Indian forces. But the mandated time period (June 10th 1990 to May 2009) doesn’t go far enough to include the Indian atrocities highlighted by the Tamil victims in their petitions to the Presidential Commission. This poses a serious moral question to the UNHRC and the three prime movers of the anti-Sri Lankan resolution which is: Is the UNHRC willing to either withdraw or amend the resolution to include the Indian atrocities committed during the three-year period of 1987 – 1990? Will it also advise the GOSL to extend the cut- off date to go beyond 1990 into the entire period of the war, going back to 1976 when the war was declared by the Tamil leadership?
  14. 14.                        A commitment by the UNHRC to comprehensively investigate all the violations committed during the entire period of 33 years will confirm the genuine commitment of the prime movers and the UNHRC High Commissioner to deliver the truth and justice”. Truth and justice cannot come  out of a short period of a long war. Anything short of a comprehensive investigation, covering the entirety of the war, from beginning to end, will be a partisan move to accuse only Sri Lanka and exonerate India. In the absence of such a credible international process should Sri Lanka alone be sacrificed on the altar of the high priests of morality consisting mainly of the  prime movers – one of whom is India, also a perpetrator of crimes against the people of Sri Lanka?
  15. 15.                         Last but not the least, is the demand by the UNHRC High Commissioner in her report to take action against the LTTE agents who were released by the GOSL and rehabilitated.  Is this an act that is influenced by compassionate human rights or is it an act dictated by the barbaric doctrine of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth? If this  kind of vindictive politics is driving the CEO of human rights should we be surprised by the Nobel Peace Prize winning President of America sitting down every Tuesday with his deadly apparatchiks to pick who should live and who should die without due  process?

 In the interest of promoting reconciliation and justice I shall thank you to kindly respond to this  e-mail dealing with what I consider to be the central issue confronting UNHRC in the post-conflict era in Sri Lanka.  I  wish to assure you that your objective and dispassionate response will enhance not only your stature as a fair and independent judge and guardian of human rights issues but also that of UNHRC which is coming under critical fire from diverse  sources.

 Awaiting an early reply

 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)

 P.S: I apologise for sending the incomplete draft earlier. It was the computer devil at work.  Please consider this as the definitive presentation by me for you to respond.


 Here is the abridged version  of the human rights  violations committed by the Indian Peace Keeping Force:

 India as Mediator

 by Old Jaffna Man

 The Indian Army came with the designation Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) but when they left it was felt that they were a Indian People Killing Force. There were no people to send them off in Trincomalee and no one to receive them when they landed in Madras.

 Civilians Massacred by IPKF

 Jaffna Hospital:- Perhaps the worst atrocity committed by the IPKF was the massacre of 68 innocent civilians inside the Jaffna Teaching Hospital in Oct. 1987.

 The names of the people massacred are:- Dr. A. Sivapathasuntheram, Dr. M. K.Ganesharatnam, Dr. Parimelalahar, Mrs. Vadivelu, Matron, Mrs. Leelawathie, Nurse, Mrs. Sivapakiam, Nurse, Mrs. Ramanathan, Nurse, Mr. Shanmugalingam, Ambulance Driver, Mr. Kanagalingam, Telephone Operator, Mr. Krishnarajah, Works Supervisor, Mr. Selvarajah, Works Supervisor, Eleven (11) Minor employees and forty six (46)

patients. One of the doctors killed was a Consultant Paediatrician and he was coming down the stairs wearing his cloak and with his stethoscope. When he saw the Indian soldier, he shouted “Doctor, but Was shot down.

 Duraiswamy brothers :- On the way to the hospital, the soldiers passed the ancestral home of late Sir Waithilingarn Duraisamy, Speaker in the State Council. Two of his sons, retired and past 70 years, were residing in their ancestral home next to the Jaffna Clock Tower. One was R. Duraiswamy (SLAS) Retd. Secretary. Ministry of Local Government and M. Duraiwswamy Retd. Staff Officer Bank of Ceylon. Both were shot and killed.

 Sivasubramaniam Family:- Mr. S. Sivasubramaniam, retired Director of Irrigation (now designated Director General), his wife, Mrs. Sivasubramaniam, retired teacher and their only son, a brilliant boy who had studied at St. John’s College, scored 4A’s in the GCE (AL) and was in the second year of Medical College.

 Mr. Sivasubramaniam was a personal friend, a quiet soft spoken gentleman, brilliant in his professional field. His entire family was erased from the face of the earth.

 Chief Justice Sharvananda’s sister and her family :– Chief Justice S. Sharvananda’s sister, her husband, son and two domestic helpers were shot dead. Justice Sharvananda, far from attending his sister’s funeral, did not even know for over one week that his sister and family had perished. There was blanket censorship over what was being done to the Tamils in Jaffna.

 Other Civilians Killed in Jaffna:- Prof. P. Chandrasekeram, University of Jaffna, Dr. R. W. Crossette Thambiah (must have been 80 at the time), Dr. Selvaratnam Former DMO Maskeliya, Dr. S. Pararajasingham JMO, L. F. M. Samuel Rtd. Teacher (St. Thomas College, Mt. Lavinia & Royal College, Colombo – older Thomians and Royalists might remember him), K. J. Sambanthar Retd. DLO & Asst.

Land Commissioner, Jaffna, Mrs. S. Sivanandaraja (mother), Mohanraj (son) Technical Officer, Irrigation Dept., Mrs. Krishnam, Mrs. M. Sebastiampillai, Mrs. N. R. Thuriappa, Mrs. V. Ruthiralingam, C. S. Aaron.

 Urumpirai:- A. Subramanium Attorney at Law, Mr. & Mrs. Pancharatnam, Rtd. Teachers, K. Navaratnam Rtd. Divisional Supdt. of Post Offices, S. Nadarajah, Formerly SLBC, Tamil Service, P. Arooran , M. Nadaraja, S. Rasanayagam Rtd. Credit Controller CCC Ltd.

 Anaikoddai:- Mrs. M. Weerasegaram Pillai, (Mother), Pillai Yasotha Weerasegararn (Daughter), Mrs. S. Thanapalasingham (Mother) Miss N. Thanapalasingham. (Daughter) S. Kulasegerampillai, Retd. Station Master, Mrs. M. Arumugam Mrs. R. Gnanamuttu, A. Candappu Rtd. State Officer, S. Selvaranee.

 Pirampadi, Kokuvil etc.:- A large number of civilians were killed in Pirampadi and Kokuvil and buried in mass graves. The whole matter requires a book to do full justice. Among those who managed to escape was late Justice K. Palakidner, who was then High Court judge Jaffna, his wife and two daughters.

 More than our relatives, we mourn the death of the elder son of the chief priest of our temple, Subramaniya Kurukkal. He performed the ancient Hindu marriage ceremony for me and my wife in 1962. Young Kannan Iyer, 28 years old, very fair, very handsome, well versed in Sanskrit and Hindu neethi and also a fully qualified Accountant, managing his own Accounting firm in Jaffna told his father to stay at home and that he would go by bicycle by a circuitous route to the temple to light the lamps.

 Instead of going to the temple, he went to heaven. He was shot just outside their gate and as it was raining heavily and the curfew was in force, nobody discovered what had happened till the following day. Twenty six persons lost their lives in my village alone, during the Indian army’s campaign to gain control of Jaffna Peninsula in October-November 1987.”

 Rape by Indian Soldiers

 The IPKF Operation in Jaffna did not stop with massacres of civilians. A large number of women were raped. The following quotation is taken from Prof. Daya Somasundaram’s book Scarred Minds – The Psychological Impact of War on Sri Lankan Tamils. Prof. Daya Somasundararn is the Professor of Psychiatry in the University of Jaffna.

” Although the total number of rapes during the Indian army operations are not known, it seemed to reach epidemic proportions. It has been verified that quite a large number, ranging from young girls who had just attained puberty to old women well past the menopause stage, were brutally raped.

 Rape became common in the context of total war as it obtained in the months of October to December (1987), when all the customary discipline and restraint operative in the army disappeared.

 The public was seen as being too sympathetic to the Tigers, harbouring and helping them against the Indian army. Thus terror became an instrument of control, a punishment for the lack of support and a lesson to the public.

 But rape was much more gruesome as it was aimed specifically at women. It was carried out with considerable brutality and impersonality, where the victims were publicly defeminised and destroyed.

 The screams and pleading of a young, attractive girl, whom three soldiers were trying to rape at gun point, still echoes in my ears. She fell at their feet and begged, ‘Please, brother, shoot me, but don’t do this…’ Fortunately for her, her pleading got through to an officer who took pity and let her go, after slapping her. A young rape victim in Tinnavelly immediately attempted to commit suicide by jumping into a well.

 Inside our village temple, where people had gathered as refugees, young village girls were molested by the Indian soldiers. Dr. W. Paramanathan, great grandson of Proctor V. Casipillai who had rebuilt the temple in 1900, after its destruction during the Portugese occupation, was an eye witness. “My blood boiled;

but I was helpless” he told me. In fact, being a young man, he was taken out twice to be shot as a Tiger and only the strong pleadings of his aunt Miss K. Charavanamuttu, retired Principal of Vadamarachchy Hindu Ladies College saved his life. Dr. Paramanathan has migrated to the United States and is living there.

 Plunder by IPKF

 The 21 day curfew proved to be a golden opportunity- to the Indian soldiers. They broke into every house, broke open every almyrah and stole the valuables inside. As everyone knows, all Jaffna Tamil Hindu women wear a lot of gold jewellery. When they had to flee at half an hour’s notice, they could not remove all their valuables. When the families returned, they found their gold jewellery, imported watches and Parker pens missing. In 1987, India was still a closed economy and these imported items were not available in India. Not merely the soldiers, even the officers helped themselves. This is what the Island of 22 Feb. 1988 reported.

 “IPKF Major Returning to India Apprehended – Alleged Contraband Jewellery:

 A Major of the IPKF who is said to have returned to India from Jaffna on a month’s holiday is alleged to have been apprehended at Chandigarh airport with having carried jewellery believed to be contraband.

 A news report appearing in the “Rani Weekly” of January 31, 1988 published in Tamil Nadu state that this Major serving in Jaffna had flown to Madras by plane and then to Chandigarh in Punjab on a month’s holiday. The Police there had searched him like any other passenger and found in his possession 100 sovereigns of jewellery consisting of bangles, broken chains, necklaces etc”.

 The story states “The Police suspect that he might have snatched them from Sri Lankan Tamils. But he says they were bought by him. The magazine asks, “if they were bought by him, could the jewellery be broken in pieces?”

 India’s My Lai – the Valvettiturai Massacre

 On 2 August 1989, the so called Indian Peace Keeping Force deliberately killed over 50 Tamil civilians in Valvettiturai in the Jaffna Peninsula in a massacre that was later described as India’s Mylai.

 David Housego reported in the London Financial Times on 17 August 1989:

 “On… Tuesday I was the first western reporter to visit Valvettiturai, a small coastal town near Jaffna, where Indian troops carried out reprisals on August 2 after the Tamil Tigers, the -Tamil guerrilla movement, ambushed one of their patrols close to the main square, killing six Indian soldiers and wounding several, others.

 After 4 1/2 hours of walking around the town and questioning many people, it becomes clear that angered soldiers deliberately shot dead unarmed civilians, burnt a large number of houses, and brutally beat many of the boys and men they caught.

 The local Citizens Committee has identified 52 bodies and says that over 120 houses were burnt – making it by far the worst atrocity alleged against Indian troops in the two years they have been in Sri Lanka.

 Most of the killings took place in the hours after the ambush, but the burning and ransacking continued , for another two days while Valvettiturai was under curfew and surrounded by Indian troops.

 What is also certain is that the official Indian explanation for the deaths – that civilians were caught in crossfire in the wake of the ambush – has no credibility. Mr. S. Selvendra, the president of the Citizens Committee and a chartered accountant, is calling for a public inquiry.

 Almost a fortnight after the event, a smell of charred remains hangs over Velvettiturai. Of the 15,000 people perhaps half have left in fear or despair. Many who remain are distraught over the loss of relatives or belongings, and uncertain how to begin again or where. What seems to have happened an August 2 is that two patrols of Indian Peace keeping Force (IPKF) troops about 30 men in all approached the centre of the town on foot in parallel columns at about 11.15 in the morning. This was market time, when the streets were most crowded. They were ambushed by firing from the roof and the street. Six soldiers were killed and 13 injured, including an officer…

 What follows are abbreviated eyewitness’ accounts of four particular incidents that occurred after the ambush.

 Mr. N. Senthivadivel, 50, was in his photographer’s shop overlooking the square when the firing began. He threw himself to the ground. Later he was taken out and made to sit cross legged with about 25 people on the square. From there he saw soldiers set fire to some of the shops and throw kerosene to add to the flames.

 At about 2 p.m. a soldier came along and said in broken English that he was going to shoot them. Two jeeps arrived and firing began. The soldier then turned round to those seated and fired on them. Two people, Mrs. K. Sivapackiyam, a washerwoman, and Mr. K. Thangarajah were killed and 10 more injured.

 S. Rajeswary, 52, is the wife of the head of the divisional land survey office. After the firing about 50 people sought shelter in her house well over 200 yards from the square – because it has a concrete roof and thus offers protection against shelling.

 About 1.30 p.m., four soldiers broke into the house. She came out of the kitchen into the hall with her husband; they were holding their hands up. She pleaded with her husband not to step forward but he advanced to speak to the soldiers. They shot him. They then called for the other men and shot four of them.

 After that they sprayed bullets killing four more people and injuring nine. Apart from her husband, Mrs. Rajeswary also lost her eldest son, 28, who was trapped in his shop which had been set on fire.

 Mr. A R. Sivaguru., 68, a retired postmaster. With some 70 other people – he took shelter in the house of Mr. Sivaganesh which also has a concrete roof. About 4 p.m., some six soldiers climbed over the back wall of the house and entered the courtyard.

Women fell at their feet crying and pleading with them not to shoot but were kicked aside.

 A sergeant then separated off the young men ages ranging from 18-35 and told them to sit in front of the cow shed next to the house. The soldiers then fired on them, killing four. When one woman screamed at her husband’s death she was told to be silent otherwise she would be killed.

 Mr. Nadarajah Anantharaj, principal of a local school and secretary of the Citizen’s Committee, still bears the mark on his face of wounds he received. This account of his treatment at the Udupiddy IPKP camp nearby is taken from his sworn affidavit. “There (at the camp) I saw many people who came along with me bleeding and crying. Four Sikh soldiers then started beating me with heavy wooden rods and with their fists.

 “One soldier dashed my head against the wall. One soldier pressed a wooden rod on my throat and was standing on the rod which was preventing my breathing. At that time I heard a voice shouting “Kill him, kill him.” I was almost losing consciousness when I managed to push the rod on my throat away, toppling the person who was standing on it.

 Why did the Indians respond so brutally? Part of the answer is that their troops have been under great strain in the Vadamaratchi region, with isolated patrols coming under fire and the Tigers firing rockets into the IPKF camp. This has left officers and men with nerves on edge.

 Were the killings and the brutality the result of soldiers running amok or did they have the approval of their officers? With substantial reinforcements brought into Velvettiturai in the wake of the ambush, officers were certainly present in the town during the shooting and the burning of homes. Some inhabitants believe that senior officers gave their tacit approval to the reprisals, if not more.

 One of my informants claimed that he had heard a senior officer say in anger not long before “I will burn Point Pedro” (a neighbouring town where there has also been trouble). “I will kill everybody.’ This may have been ill chosen words of intimidation not meant literally…”

 George Fernandez, Indian Opposition M.P. one time Cabinet Minister and later Defence Minister commented a few months later:

 “When in early August, 1987, 1 had said that Mr. Rajiv Gandhi’s military adventure in Sri Lanka would be India’s Viet Nam, I had not anticipated that India’s Viet Nam would also have its own My Lai. Of course, I was aware and I had also said repeatedly that soldiers everywhere alike, their training and the rigours of their life, not to speak of the brutalisation caused by war, making them behave in the most inhuman ways when under pressure.

 Now, in Velvettiturai, the Indian army has enacted its My Lai. London’s Daily Telegraph commenting editorially on the barbarism exhibited by the Indian army in Velvettiturai says that, if anything “this massacre is worse than My Lai. Then American troops simply ran amok. In the Sri Lankan village, the Indians seem to have beenmore systematic; the victims being forced to lie down, and then shot in the back”.

 Valvettiturai was uncovered by David Housego, the Delhi-based correspondent of London’s Financial Times who visited the scene of the massacre 13 days after the black deed had been done on August 2. His report appeared in his paper on August 17, though London’s Telegraph had carried on August 13 a story on the incident from its New Delhi correspondent, Jeremy Gavron, based on the information that was already circulating in India’s capital.

 The Indian press – a miniscule section of it – caught up with it only on September 3, with a report by Rita Sebastian in the Indian Express. In fact, there was a planned black out of the news of Velvettiturai by the Indian government, in which a large section of the Indian press was only too happy to collude. The armed forces are India’ s most sacred cow at the best of times, but when they indulge in atrocities, they are more so…” (Tamil Weekly,  November 13 – 19, 2005)

Ukraine: The Law, the Putsch and the Imposter

March 2nd, 2014

Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey -Courtesy Pravda

The irresponsibility of the western media calling Oleksandr Turchynov “Interim President” and referring to the “new Government” of Ukraine walks hand in hand with the notion that Governments can be deposed and instated by groups of armed thugs on the streets. Turchynov claims power, but what about the massive voting fraud in the Rada?

Under the law, under the Constitution of Ukraine, Oleksandr Turchynov is not the Interim President, he is an imposter, the leader of a Putsch who has as much right to declare himself or to be declared Interim President as the author of this article, or anyone else for that matter. Why doesn’t Turchynov, the subject of a criminal investigation in the past, not declare himself Queen of Sheeba?

In any civilized nation, the event which rubber-stamps a Government is not an armed uprising in which thugs shoot at the police. In a civilized nation, what rubber-stamps a government is something called an election and in the last election, Viktor Yanukovich was elected President of Ukraine with 12.48 million votes, as leader of the Party of regions, gaining almost 49 per cent of the vote against Tymoshenko’s 45.47%.

Under the Agreement signed between President Yanukovich and the members of the Opposition in February 2014, the forthcoming election was to be brought forward from 2015 to late 2014, so until then, the President of Ukraine is Viktor Yanukovich. Under the existing Constitution, in the absence of a Presidential exercise of duties, it is the Prime Minister who takes office as Interim President and the Presidency is ratified by the Constitutional Court.

Mykola Azarov resigned the Premiership on January 28 2014, and was replaced as Prime Minister by Sergiy Arbuzov. In replacing the legitimate Prime Minister with Arseniy Yatsenyuk and in terminating the powers of the Constitutional Court judges, using a proxy voting system which has been outlawed during President Yanukovich’s Presidency, and in the absence of many of the Party of Regions deputies in the Rada, the action of proclaiming Turchynov as Interim President and of replacing Government Ministers has no legal basis whatsoever and is therefore void under Ukrainian law and as per the Ukrainian Constitution.

  A civilized country is ruled by the law and obeys the norms of its Constitution. The only time Turchynov garnered any votes was when he stood for Mayor of Kiev in 2008, and got less than 20 per cent of the vote. Hardly a democratic platform on which to stand. In fact, the more one digs into the past of Mr. Turchynov, the worse it stinks.

Formerly head of the Ukrainian Secret Service (SBU), he was the subject of a criminal investigation for destroying papers linking his ally Timoshenko with a criminal on the lists of the American FBI (Ten Most Wanted, Semyon Mogilevich). The entire political process during the last week has the same dubious stench surrounding it. For a start, how does the Rada make any decisions when most of the main political block, the Party of Regions, was absent?

And let us analyse the constitution of the Rada: The Party of Regions (Yanukovich’s Party) holds 134 seats. 117 are non-affiliated, many of these voting with the Party of regions; the Communists have 32 seats, often voting with the Party of Regions. On the other side is the Fatherland Party (Timoshenko) with 88 seats and UDAR (Klitschko) with 42, then the Freedom Party with 36.

How, then, is Yanukovich ousted with “over 300 votes”? The answer is simple. As you can see from the photographs, on the streets of Kiev were some innocent civilians, starry-eyed youths caught up in a drunken euphoria caused by lies and misguided promises by ex-boxers, ex-soccer players and the like but also many Fascist extremists, armed thugs who had started to shoot at the police to provoke a reaction. Look at the pictures.

Ukraine: The Law, the Putsch and the Imposter. 52271.jpeg

And look at the picture showing members of the Rada holding the voting cards of other members. This explains the “vote”. Multiple voting for absentee members. Ladies and gentlemen, the photograph on the left denounces massive electoral fraud.

So, President Yanukovich did not “flee” leaving a void that had to be filled (the reason quoted for his “removal”), he absented himself temporarily from the fray to avoid any more bloodshed. For the CIA, 88 deaths is small fry if it justifies a change of government and a veering westwards by a mineral-rich nation on Russia’s borders, but this does not a revolution make nor a Government constitute. Had Viktor Yanukovich remained in his palace, it would have been stormed by these Fascist thugs and his armed guard would have had to open fire, worsening the situation further by creating more bloodshed.

The entire Putsch was hastily carried out and was entirely the result of political interests from beginning to end. The education minister, Dmitry Tabachnik, was removed because his policy had been “too pro-Russian”, the Russian, Hungarian and Romanian languages have for now lost their status as official languages of Ukraine and the Prosecutor-General, Viktor Pshonka, was detained, because he was identified with the imprisonment of Timoshenko, for abuse of power.

Members of Parliament inside the Rada had declared that they felt they had to do something quickly otherwise the crowd outside would have stormed the building.

This, in a civilized nation, is no way to conduct policy, has no legal foundation whatsoever and therefore, Mr. Oleksandr Turchynov is an imposter and a Putsch leader who brings ridicule to his country. Who needs a circus when Kiev is crawling with clowns, and why doesn’t Turchynov declare himself Queen of Sheeba, King of Planet Zog of the Mayor of Saturn…together with his less than twenty per cent of the popular vote?

Ukraine: The Law, the Putsch and the Imposter. 52270.jpeg


The question is, Oleksandr Turchynov knows this, and from the second he wakes up in the morning, to the second he goes to bed, he knows he is an imposter, he knows he was not elected and he knows that his Putsch dissolved the only legal bodies with the power to conduct affairs of State as he usurped the presidency from Viktor Yanukovich.

Oleksandr Turchynov is not, legally, the Interim President of the Ukraine and his Government is not a Government – it is a clique of imposters. Any foreign powers greeting and recognizing them is guilty of criminal association. This is the law.


When a “Regime Change” orchestrated by the West back fires

March 2nd, 2014


It all started with the European Union at one point developed its Eastern Partnership Initiative and  promoted the idea of association agreements with some of the focus countries purely based on geopolitical ambitions of  NATO. Ukraine was a prime target.

Shortly before signing the Eastern Partnership Initiative at the Vilnius Summit of the Eastern Partnership at the end of last November President Yanukovich had second thoughts about getting only EU involved in the deal.

Evidently he understood the possible implications of entry into force of this agreement realising that the EU hasn’t got the sufficient economic strength on its own to rescue fast diminishing economy in Ukraine. Then he decided to invite economically more powerful Russia also into the negotiation.

President Yanukovich knew how the IMF works. It never gives money overnight. This was perhaps one of the reasons why President Yanukovych ultimately chose not to sign the Association Agreement, because the money that he would have had the chance to get through the IMF was linked to certain very costly reforms in the line of austerity like raising domestic prices for energy 40%, like freezing wages, lowering pensions, and so on. So this was tantamount to a social time bomb.

As the  Head of the Russian mission to the EU, Ambassador Vladimir Chizhov said in his interview at New Europe Studios, those who immediately started blaming Russia and still continue to blame Russia are totally unfair and incorrect, because Russia did not interfere in this situation. The only thing Russia did was to outline to our Ukrainian colleagues the implications that association with the European Union would have for the Ukrainian economy and its relations with other countries, including Russia.

Even schoolbooks were changed to promote association with the European Union, and of course those people who came out to protest against that particular decision by President Yanukovych were eager to see Ukraine closer to the European Union. Most of them had no idea what the Association Agreement is all about. A very few people had read it. They mostly thought that immediately after signature they would have a visa-free regime, create mass exodus to Britain and that the EU will open up its limitless coffers and pour huge amounts of money into Ukraine, a wishful thinking.

But eventually those protests evolved into something different. If you compare pictures from the Maidan square, the Independence square in Kiev, in the first days and weeks to what happened towards the end of the sit-in, they look completely different because the popular protest was side lined and then almost eliminated by thuggish-looking armed hooligans, well-equipped with steel helmets, with flak jackets, with bats, and ultimately with kalashnikovs. The flags that were seen were no longer EU flags, but those red and black flags of the ultra-nationalists, and the portraits were not of Van Rompuy or Barroso, not even Ashton. They were of Stepan Bandera, a well-known Nazi collaborator and war criminal who is still considered a hero among the ultra-nationalists.

All those events, and they lasted for months, needed money. The protests were fed, equipped, heated. Such things, indeed, require a budget. Not necessarily the outcome of those protests was defined solely by croissants delivered by a well-known representative of the U.S. State Department. But evidently, both political and material support as well as international publicity were promptly provided for the opposition, by EU and the United States, whereas Russia kept a neutral stand.

At the end of the day, Majority of the Ukrainian people do not recognize the new authorities in Kiev, and they have every right to do so because this changeover of power in the Ukraine was an act of questionable legitimacy and undemocratic. The person called himself as the minister of interior in the new government is an unknown position in the Ukraine constitution – there is no minister of interior because according to the constitution, any constitution, of Ukraine, ministers of interior, defence and other power structures, they can only be put in office by a decree of a president. So, this new government, which was promised to be a government of national unity, is far from that because it does not represent the eastern half of the country. Actually, only a small number of political factions are represented. So it cannot be called an inclusive government

The majority of the population of Ukraine lives in the Russian speaking East.  Millions upon millions of these people have family ties, historic ties, cultural and linguistic links with mainland Russia. The majority of voters in a potential election are in the East. Today this has been completely neglected by those who have seized power in Kiev their western backers like EU and US. The local governors and local parliamentarians of the east are the majority in the country, in addition they had their own  local congress in Kharkov, in Donetz and I many Eastern Cities.and they are now prepared to draw their own line.

Of course the economy of Ukraine is in a mess and Russia as the powerful neighbour has due obligation to put that house in order.

Both Russia and the West say they want a peaceful resolution, but they are at polar opposites on the fundamental question of who is the legitimate authority in Ukraine.

Western powers say it is the new interim government in Kiev, authorised by the Ukrainian parliament

Russia says Kiev is in the hands of an illegitimate government of “far-right extremists” with “xenophobic, anti-Semitic and neo-fascist” views, installed as the result of a “coup d’etat”, which deposed President Victor Yanukovych illegally.

Mr Putin wants the West and Kiev to go back to the defunct agreement signed with Victor Yanukovych on 21 February to hold discussions about constitutional reform to satisfy the demands of all parties and regions – presumably shorthand for reforms to turn Ukraine into a federation, with more self-rule for Russian-speaking regions and Crimea.

But that would effectively mean recognising that Mr Yanukovych is still president and that the new Ukrainian government is therefore illegitimate.

The West is not going to agree to that.

Latest Information

Worst Man for the Job: What the Hell is Obama Thinking?

By (about the author)   How oblivious or arrogant do you have to be to spend $5 billion dollars destabilizing a country (the actual total is undoubtedly much higher), have your diplomats caught on tape planning a coup, bring a gang of fascist thugs to power on Russia’s doorstep–whose first order of business is to outlaw the Russian language, conduct a purge of opposing parties, threaten the  Russian-speaking population, threaten to restore Ukraine’s nuclear status and provoke and threaten Russia non-stop… and have the “balls” to lecture anyone about interfering? Oh, add to the pot that you have done the same exact thing in several other countries in the past few years alone. It simply boggles the mind.

Crimea forms its own fleet as Ukraine Navy chief sides with region

Tea, sandwiches, music, photos with self-defense forces mark peaceful Sunday in Simferopol

‘Russian forces in Ukraine could be a stabilizing factor in a country with no legitimate govt’

Thousands in Moscow, St Petersburg rally in support of Russian speakers in Ukraine

Sort out who’s boss in Kiev, Crimea takes care of itself – republic’s parliament speaker

Ukrainian troops dispatched in Crimea switch to region’s side – sources

New head of Ukraine’s navy defects in Crimea (BBC)

Ukrainian warships voluntarily leave Sevastopol: sources

Sevastopol City Council refuses to recognize Kyiv leadership

Vladimir Putin sees small protests, mass support for troops in Ukraine

Ukraine Navy chief swears allegiance to Crimea (VIDEO)

675,000 Ukrainians pour into Russia as ‘humanitarian crisis’ looms


Copyright © 2014 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress