H. L. D. Mahindapala

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In a finger-biting drama of forty minutes President Obama watched his elite SEALS execute his shoot-to-kill order, without giving Osama bin Laden ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the number one enemy of America ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” a chance to hit back or face charges, whatever his crimes may be. It was a spectacular and vote-winning military operation that will ensure his second term as president. In short, he did a Mahinda Rajapaksa. He even buried Osama in the sea exactly the way that Mahinda Rajapaksa buried Velupillai Prabhakaran. There is, however, a difference: Prabhakaran was armed to the teeth surrounded by his bodyguards but Osama was unarmed living in his house with his wives and children. So will there be an inquiry into the assassination of an unarmed man?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ President Obama has no problems with the UN or the Security Council. The Security Council, in fact, has endorsed the killing of Osama without giving him a fair chance to defend himself against his killers or a trial. Nor will President Obama or his mates in the NATO will face charges for being a part of the joint air strikes that killed innocent children and grandchildren of Mohammed Gaddafi in his compound.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The EU leaders who sponsored the resolution at the UNHRC against Sri Lanka for violating human rights were falling over each other to congratulate Obama for getting Osama ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” no questions asked. They are also jubilant that NATO planes have targeted GaddafiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s house and killed his children and grandchildren ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” no questions asked. That is covered up and even justified as a legitimate part of overthrowing dictators and restoring the rights of the people to elect their leaders. But that legitimacy of removing a fascist dictator in Sri Lanka and restoring democracy for the Tamil people to elect their leaders is not given to Sri Lanka.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The air-strikes of both America and EU have hit civilians and even the rebels. Will Ban Ki-Moon appoint another panel of experts (APEs) to inquire into it? On the contrary, he has joined the Western leaders saying he was ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-relievedƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ with the killing of Osama and added that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-justice has been doneƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. But he is not ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-relievedƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, nor does he hail it as an act of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-doing justiceƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ when Sri Lanka targeted the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s deadliest terroristƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ (FBI) who was also labeled as ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the latest Pol Pot of AsiaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ by James Burns of the New York Times. Why?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Both Presidents adopted the same methodology to deal with terrorism and achieved the same goals. Both Sri Lanka and the West did what had to be done after failing to negotiate with an implacable and intransigent enemy. But President Obama gets the Nobel Peace prize for his shoot-to-kill success and President Mahinda Rajapakse is given the APES for winning the longest running war in Asia and eliminating the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s deadliest terrorist. Both presidents became the agents for fulfilling the Biblical dictum: those who live by the sword will die by the sword. But the Churches offer thanksgivings for ObamaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s killings and condemn Mahinda Rajapakse for achieving the same results through the same means. It seems that killing, like kissing, goes by favour.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If the air-strikes of the WestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s killings of civilians and children ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” irrespective of the numbers ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” are praiseworthy why isnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t the same commendation applicable to Sri Lanka, if it did happen in Sri Lanka? Of course, the argument could be raised saying that ObamaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s squad killed only Osama and two others. But how many civilians would have been spared by Obama if Osama was shielded by a human buffer of 300,000 Muslims? Would he not have targeted Osama, perhaps with instructions to keep collateral damage to 300,000 Muslims at the minimum? Or would he let Osama escape to save the civilians? Obama also said that this war is not against the Muslims. Nor was MahindaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s war against the Tamils. Both fought a common enemy: terrorists. Both presidents did what they had to do: save their people from terror and both presidents mirrored each other. If one deserves praise why isnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t praise due to the other?.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Besides, when Mahinda Rajapakse won the war he and the nation were condemned for celebrating the victory. They were told that eating a piece of kiributh was immoral. It was first condemned as ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-triumphalismƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ by ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Saravanamuttu and his catchers in the NGO circuit, In fact, one pseudo-intellectual, Izzeth Hussain, said that Mahinda Rajapakse should have poured sand over his head like Muhammed II when he conquered Constantinople in 1453 instead of kissing the tarmac at the airport in gratitude and praise of the victory. ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚and Jehan (Pacha) Perera deplored the spontaneous celebrations on the streets. Will this duo condemn the natural outpourings of the American people who were celebrating exuberantly, mostly in New York, Washington, Boston and opposite the White House? Will MoonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s APEs who were critical of the Sri Lankan ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-triumphalismƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” an accusation copied directly from the terminology of the local NGO mudalali ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Saravanamuttu — pass the same strictures on the Americans, saying that this triumph will open the path for the West to ride rough shod over the Muslim minorities in Europe and America?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In summary, why should Sri Lanka be put on the dock for doing exactly what President Obama, President Sarkozy and Prime Minister David Cameron do to their enemies who threaten their sovereignty, peace, law and order in their countries? Why should they raise the issue of human rights and international humanitarian law against Sri Lanka when they violate it blatantly for their political ends without any compunction?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ I am not against human rights. Nor do I condemn human rights, as defined and practiced now, by the international community as a Western product, and the Easterners should be allowed to apply their oriental standards according to their cultural norms. No. I am all for human rights as long as it is applied evenly, uniformly and universally without exception. I protest vehemently when the big powers use human rights to intervene in the domestic affairs of smaller nations who are faced with similar, if not worst, enemies destroying their peace, law and order. They have the same right as President Obama, President Sarkozy and David Cameron to target their enemies of peace, law and order, even if it means violating international law and human rights. What quantum of human rights was applied by the SEALS when they shot unarmed Osama at pointblank range? How did international law operate when ObamaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s helicopters dashed across the Pakistani borders below radar level without the permission of the sovereign state of Pakistan? Will the prime ministers and presidents of NATO be put on trial for killing the children and grand children of Gaddafi?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Human rights are not served by chanting selectively and mechanically the mantras of human rights because you have power to ignore the ICJ or are hired to pose as champions of human rights by foreign states to suit their political agenda. There are times when the greater cause of human rights is served by violating human rights. In fact, under certain circumstances, observing human rights can be detrimental to the larger issues of human rights. Perhaps, the best example of serving the greater cause of human rights was demonstrated in Sri Lanka when the forces fired at the Tiger targets and breached their defences to let the Tamil people ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” roughly 300,000 in all ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” break loose from the vicious grip of the worst fascist terrorist that walked the earth. On any principle of proportionality or morality, the saving of 300,000 should be considered as the higher morality and principle and not the fictitious figures concocted by those who had never counted the bodies on the ground.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ When the London bus bombing killed 52 civilians on 7/7 of 2005 the reaction against the home-grown Muslim terrorists was to crush them instantly. The then Prime Minister, Tony Blair openly declared that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the rules must changeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and passed draconian laws in Parliament. President Bush passed the Patriots Act after 9 /11. These are instinctive and predictable responses caused by violent extremists who operate outside the democratic framework and the states have a right to crush them ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” particularly if they are intransigent and ruthless terrorists, committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Pundits in NGOs like ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and JehanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Perera pontificated that by going all out to crush the violence of terrorists with similar counter-terrorist tactics the states descend to the same level of their brutal enemies. It sounds fine in theory. But in reality these inane political pieties have never served the communities facing the horrors of terrorist violence or wars. Their moral postures have no pragmatic value for peace, or law and order ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” the only environment within which human rights can thrive. Their public postures serves only their interests of raking in money from their equally hypocritical funding agents abroad.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The history of the 33-year-old Vadukoddai War demonstrates without a doubt that their political pieties, formulas, analyses, theses (some of which were peer reviewed for doctoral awards) never worked for peace or the protection of civilians victims. The negotiated settlements they hailed ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…”mainly because they came from their funding masters abroad ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” failed even before they could withdraw the dollars from their bank accounts. ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Perera went as far as awarding a prize to ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ for advocating a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-negotiated settlementƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Neither ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ nor ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Perera achieved anything for peace. Not a thing. Their contributions have been to manufacture excuses for prolonging the war by insisting on ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-negotiated settlementsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ which had never worked when the Indians brought the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement or the international community brought the Cease Fire Agreement. How can any rational being make an award for a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-negotiated settlementƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ when nothing in that name succeeded? This is like awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama when he was running wars right across the globe. Our local NGO wallahs have been producing these ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-pachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ programmes essentially to hoodwink the public and their donors that they are doing a great service to peace.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Their attempts to bring about a negotiated settlement were no better than A. T. Ariyaratne, one of the leading NGO Mudalalis, running peace marches from Moratuwa to Panadura and videoing them to convince the foreign donors that he deserve a bigger share of the dollars funneled to NGOs competing for the dwindling dollars in the aid programmes abroad. He never ran a peace march in the north which was the theatre of the war. But he posed as the hero who ran marches to convince the peaceful people between Moratuwa and Panadura that the war should be stopped in the north. Incidentally, Ariyaratne too was there for ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ PereraƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s award charade, along with former President Chandrika Kumaratunga. These are shows put up to impress the public that the miserable failures are the real heroes of peace and not the forces who fought in land, air and sea without ever seeing the inside of the American AmbassadorsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ residence where the NGO stooges are entertained lavishly for services rendered to the West.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ These NGOs pundits have been the most despicable moralists who lived off the suffering and the blood of our people. Certainly, their sham theatrics helped to sustain their expensive life-style, build mansion for their children, travel first class in airlines, smoke the most expensive cigarettes without bringing any relief to the victims of the war waged by the most privileged Jaffna Tamil leadership crying ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-discriminationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ against them, even when they were holding the highest position in the judiciary, executive, legislature and the private sector.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The NGO have to stoke the fires of divisive politics for their future survival. . ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Perera came out of a meeting with the Patricia A. Butenis claiming that they discussed, along with the TNA MPs, ways and means of using the APEƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s report for unity and harmony. The very composition of the tea party ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” NGOs and TNA ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” indicates clearly that a gathering of the leading defenders of Prabhakaran (ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PakiƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ was full of praise for the military capabilities of his secret hero, Prabhakaran) who are still committed to a bogus ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-negotiated settlementƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ cannot lead to a new era of peace and amity among communities. They gathered to explore possibilities of putting pressure on the Sri Lankan government by using the anti-Sri Lankan report to get more than what they have already got.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The NGO/TNA lobby, like the Tamil expatriates, is acting on the premise that the APEsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ report has given them a new lease of life to demand their pound of flesh. India, who was a significant invitee to the soiree held at the American AmbassadressƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s residence, has already told the TNA to demand more ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” more than what they gave in the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement.. The very nature of these anti-Sri Lankan participants indicate that they are determined to use the APEƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s report as the next step to promote their political agenda. It is also a prelude to the coming Robert OƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢Blake. They didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t get together to share some tea and sympathy for Sri Lanka. After her tea party Patricia A. Butenis is now armed fully to brief Blake with the next move. They have their own political agenda. This meeting was to publicly strengthen the hands of he NGOs and the TNA to go ahead with their divisive politics.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The test of their meeting will be in their statements and actions that are yet to unfold. ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PachaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Perera will be exposed in the next phase. Right now he is acting as the spin doctor to cover up the hidden agenda of the anti-Sri Lankan forces that met at the American tea party. They will use the APEƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s report to get more ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” more than even what was given in the 13th Amendment.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It is also significant that Sri Lanka asked Blake to convey its congratulations to President Obama for targeting the most wanted terrorist leader. Blake naturally beamed like a Chesire cat.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It is a pity that the Sri Lankan government missed a great opportunity at this meeting. While congratulating Blake he should have been asked why President Obama gets the Nobel Peace Prize and why the West keep sending APEs to Mahinda Rajapakse.