Non Aligned Movement’s Challenge To Ban Ki Moon On Sri Lankan Panel Plausible!
Posted on July 4th, 2010

LankaWeb Weekly Editorial

July 4th 2010
Now that the UN Secretary General Ban Ki MoonƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ has on his hands theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ watchful eyeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ of the World’s Non Aligned Movement (NAM) and nations incorporated by itƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and the criticism of his bull in a Chinashop call to investigate Sri Lanka for war crimesƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ perhaps he should re-thinkƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the folly of hisƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ call.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In addition to NAM there already are several other world powers including Russia and China disagreeing with Moon which exposes the concept that the man seems somewhat desperate to implement his call which he may have to do using proxies and remote control as the panel appointed by him will not be granted Visas to enter Sri Lanka when one envisions the following related facts which contradict the veracity and perhaps even legalities relative to the call.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The nations linked to NAMƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  preparing to challenge UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon over his appointment of a three-member panel to advise him on accountability issues during the final stages of the separatist war that led to the military defeat ofƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Tamil TigerƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ terrorists last year has asked very legitimate questions which expose Ban Ki Moon’s portrayed bias that could also be linked to the insistence of his UN colleagues with Tamil sympathies where if one were to take it a step further might hint at Tamil Tiger sympathies whether inadvertently or not!

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ While The UN move sponsored by MoonƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ is widely regarded as a precursor to an imminent war crimes inquiry against troops and guerrillas as reported in the world media it is being pooh poohed by several Global Nations which also seem to be aware of the bias Ban Ki Moon’s call is steeped in.

The pointers towardsƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ NAMƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and its 118 strong membership’sƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ concerns on this issue is said toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ haveƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ been posted in aƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ draft letter circulatedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ among diplomats of the member countries represented at the UN in New York.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ As reported as subject contentƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ “ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ItƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ has expressed serious concerns about the appointment of the panel against the clearly expressed wishes of the country concerned,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  without any mandate from the Human Rights Council, the Security Council or the UN General AssemblyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and appears to be a unilateral call by Moon which has every right to be repudiated and trashed on this basis alone!

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ At this time it is unclearƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ whether the anticipated draft letter will receive the endorsement of allƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the NAM members as a few countries like IndiaƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ appear undecided. However,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ if it does receive approval which it more than likely willƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  and pursuedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ regardless of India’s stand towards objectives,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Egypt, the current chair nationƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ is expected to forward the letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon who should giveƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  serious thoughtƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ towards withdrawing his call rather than opening a can of worms which he can ill afford to, particularly with neither a realƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ mandateƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ norƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ tangible evidence beyond hearsay fabricatedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and cooked up innuendoƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  particularly when the man is also seeking a second term in office.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ As far as his entitlement based upon merit toward a second term, it seems somewhat questionable ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ as all he has done in his term of office is pick up where his dubious predecessor Koffi Annan left off and continued in a myopic as well asƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ faltering manner in how he has dealt with many world issues reminiscent of a puppet where the strings are pulled by sources more powerful than himself and the related biases stick out like sore thumbs!ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Curiously in the case involving Sri Lanka apparentlyƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Moon has tried his hand at unilateral decision making or so it seems until the true nature of his inspiration is revealed~ namely the other culpable sources within the UN with their particular conflicts of interestsƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ which have egged him on towards their own agendas which makes him a pawn in a dirty game andƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ gullible enough to be misled by them.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ While there has been no official collective response yet from NAMƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ towardsƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Ban Ki MoonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s purportedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ move to appoint theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ investigative panelƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  for Sri Lanka, objections are reported as having comeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ from Russia, China and Iran whereƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Russia and China are not members of the NAM albeit academic towards the importance of exposing Moon andƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  what many believeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  is an indiscretion without a real mandate!ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Mr. BanƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ seems to have got something right towards his credit however in choosingƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to appoint a similar international panel to investigate charges of war crimes against Israel over the May 31 attack on a flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. But the proposed panel to investigate Israel was authorised by the Security Council while the panel on Sri Lanka was not, case in point and food for thought!

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The present anticipatedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ NAM letter of protest under reviewƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ is a follow up of a previous oneƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to Mr. Ban last March, objecting to the initial appointment of the proposed panel on Sri Lanka where after a response from the Secretary-General, in which he claimed he had a legitimate right to appoint such a panel, NAM hadƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ virtually backed down from a possible confrontation with the U.N chief according to very reliable sources and confirmed in the international media at the time.

He was then quoted that he was convinced itƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ was well within hisƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  power as Secretary-General of the United Nations to ask such a panel to furnishƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ him with their advice of this nature, and thatƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ it does not in any way infringe on the Sovereignty of Sri Lanka by his definition.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ This time aroundƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ however, with the current draft letter, NAM is reverting to its original hard-line stand, namely, that Mr. Ban has exceeded his political authority in naming the panel despite objections from certainƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

NAM members, mostly from the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) to the draft letter primarily on the ground that it would undermine the Secretary-General’s push for an international probe of the Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla at which point the issue becomes somewhat complicated making some analysts believeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ that if there is no fullƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ consensus among NAM members, the letter might not be sent to the Secretary-General but in the best interests of the true protocols which govern Sri Lanka’s rights as a Sovereign Nation it should in fact be forwarded. ParticularlyƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ when there is noƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ tangible incriminating evidence to suggest that Sri Lanka is the guilty party based on idle accusations made by enemies of the State and that there was indeedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ a right to defend her Sovereignity and Territorial Integrity from terrorists!

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Very importantly the focal point in the Draft Letter towards its support and credibilityƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ needs to be emphasizedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  that Sri Lanka’s President Mahinda Rajapaksa has already appointed his own commission of inquiry to probe any violations of international norms and standards during the conflict and quoted as saying

“It is a well recognized international norm that in situations where there are allegations or breaches of international lawƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  against a country,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  the country concerned should in the first instance be allowed to conduct its own investigation and to make known its findings.”ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In this instance as reported,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  the draft letter has raised objections thatƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the Secretary-General has appointed a panel on Sri Lanka to advise him on the modalities, applicable standards and comparative experience with regard to accountability processes on the grounds thatƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ “even before the commission of inquiry in Sri Lanka has commenced its inquiry without anyƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ specific request from any member state or group or U.N. body where at least the opinion of any group of member states or U.N. body could have been a courtesy although never requested in the high handed manner MoonƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ has planned toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ conduct his unilateral inquiry through a panel of his choice!ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The three members of the Sri Lanka panel, named last month, are Marzuki Darusman of Indonesia as chairperson, Yasmin Sooka of South Africa and Steven Ratner of the United States who might asƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ well be looking for other options given the speculative nature of Moon’s mindset! AndƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ as far as Ban Ki Moon is concerned~ he should seriously think about retirement as his best option or risk the title Bungling Moon!

One Response to “Non Aligned Movement’s Challenge To Ban Ki Moon On Sri Lankan Panel Plausible!”

  1. Sri Rohana Says:

    Again when ever we need help always China, Russia, and Iran came forward. This scenario we have seen since 1953 Sri Lanka- China rubber-Rice agreement era. Russia helped us lot since 1956. In 2009 UNO’s European proposals against Sri Lanka was defeated with the help of those countries. Those two countries actually like elder brothers to Sri Lanka. In returned they never influenced us unnecessary or interfered to our internal matters. This is truly a diplomacy and help at time we needed. So my opinion Sri Lanka’s foreign policy and the trade relation’s priority have to give more towards these countries than any others. We should have free trade agreements with these two countries and Iran.

    What is India’s position on Mr. B(e)an Ki Moon’s panel. Is India support to Mr.B(e)an or support to Sri Lanka. Yet our so-called big brother is dumb? Hope they have a worst dilemma at this moment. They cannot support to Sri Lanka. If they support to SL their own creation LTTE will go against them. If they take pro LTTE Mr. B(e)an’s side then they will expose again to SL community. This westerner’s panel pushed India in to a bad corner.

    On the other hand has India ever behaved as a true friend to support us? They have trained racist tamil tiger terrorists against us openly. There were Tamil Tiger training bases in India. The Indian government and RAW provided training, equipment, facilities, and safe haven to tamil terrorist groups. In 1985 era they tried to invade Sri Lanka. It is a well-known fact. Even still tamil country (tamil nadu) openly support to tamil racist agenda. What are the actions taken by central government in this regard? There are lots more we can write about India’s double standards.

    Our so- called brother wants only business. They want free trade agreements and all the business agendas but in return never ever defend us from the western hegemonism. Actually they are with them throughout. We have to have diplomatic relations within the SAARC agreements and whatever facilities we consider have to give all the other SAARC members too. Need not any specialty only to India.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2022 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress