H. L. D. Mahindapala

Anyone reading Izeth Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s replies critically will agree with the saying that the more a baboon tries to climb higher the more he reveals his butt, not to mention the other oscillating parts of the lower anatomy. He is an unabashed exhibitionist flashing from roof tops his vulgar ego as he makes a desperate bid to recycle his perennial obsession of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the world.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ All of his replies can be summarized as advertisements written by Hoo-zany, for Hoo-zany emphasizing how great Hoo-zany was in the diplomatic world. His ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Me- Me-MeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ theme comes out loud and clear in his kohay-da-yannay-mallay-pol responses. Consequently, he becomes an easy target and I make no apologies for bucketing him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” not because he is a Muslim, as he claims, but to expose him as a charlatan who imagines that he has been a shaker and mover of the Non-aligned movement in 1971.

Not surprisingly, he does the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Me-Me-MeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ thing again in his latest reply. For instance, he claims that he ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-was chosen for that (Peking) posting because of the exceptional quality of my political reporting in Manila. My top secret reports from Peking were stolen from the Foreign Ministry by Jungle Dissanaike and were read by J.R.J and others, but I donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t want to go into all that.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Of course, he wraps himself in the mystique of a diplomatic shaman (or is it sham-man?) and in this instance he praises his own quality of reporting as something ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚.

So what could have been that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, as claimed by him, in the political reporting of Hoo-zany from Manila? First, if it was that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ why are his replies in LAKBIMA NEWS so mediocre? Second, all of us who have read the Wikileak reports on Sri Lanka, written by American ambassadors, can easily get a taste of what diplomats send back home in their diplomatic pouches. What is striking in each Wikileak is the attitude of the American ambassadors to the local events and personalities and not the contents, most of which are common knowledge. Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s reports could not be any different from that of the American ambassadors, if there was any valuable substance in them at all. But when Hoo-zany claims that his reports are ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ he seems to be placing himself, as usual, above all other diplomats except the unnamed five he cites for vain claims of his non-existent greatness. My guess is that his reports could not have been anything more than cut-and-paste from Manila newspapers. Well, if I am wrong he can prove his case by producing some samples of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ reporting, no?

Besides, any senior journalist, moving in diplomatic circles, will tell you how they are invited for dinners and lunches by ambassadors and intelligence officers to pick their brains. Like journalists the diplomats too are after information and they too are after scoops to inform their home offices of valuable intelligence for their decision-makers to act before other nations get wind of new developments and stymie their moves on the international chess board. Information is power and getting it first is important as interpreting the information.

Wikileak reports reveal that the American diplomats have picked the brains of the local political class and written reports to keep the State Department informed of the latest Sri Lankan events that might affect their national interests. The reports of the American ambassadors reveal that their reports are no better than that of a good journalist, except that it is written by the American ambassadors, the chief reporter for the American government.

So is Hoo-zany claiming that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the exceptional quality of (his) political reportingƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ was earth-shattering, or better than that of any intelligent journalist? In fact, by his own admission Hoo-zany affirms that the reports of journalists like G. K. Reddy were valued by the Indian government more than that of the Indian diplomats. Hoo-zany commendation of Reddy confirm that if we had hired a competent journalist in Manila when Hoo-zany was there we could have closed down the embassy and saved a lot of taxpayersƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ money.

Also his claim to be an ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ diplomat based on his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reports from Peking (which) were stolen from the Foreign Ministry by Jungle Dissanaike and were read by J.R.J and othersƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ is as hilarious his other claims of his greatness. I cannot comment on those papers because I have not read them. But for him to claim that he produced such ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptional top secret reports from PekingƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ in 1972 ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” a time when the closed society of China was an indecipherable conundrum — must have been indeed remarkable because the best of Western analysts, pouring millions into their intelligence networks, were breaking their necks to penetrate the inscrutable Chinese Wall of secrecy with hardly any success.

Besides, in the 1970s China was in the throes of internal and external turmoil. The Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) was at its peak. The ping-pong diplomacy of Henry Kissinger had resulted in Richard Nixon shaking hands with Mao in Peking. The Sino-Soviet split was also at its intense peak feeding internal party divisions. The armies of Red brigades with little Mao Red books were turning China upside down. No one was quite certain or clear as to what was happening in China. Anyone who could have got an insight into the inscrutable politics of China was highly valued in academic, political, diplomatic and journalistic circles.

I remember when Dudley SenanayakeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s ambassador to China, Robert Gunawardena, who was on a short break in Colombo, decided to deliver a lecture on the Cultural Revolution, the Red Cross Hall down Turret Road (I think?) was overflowing. Even the American Embassy sent one of its officers to take down notes. The expectation was to get at least a glimpse of the events shaking China. RobertƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s speech was a disappointment because he was mouthing Chinese propaganda instead of analyzing the mysteries of the Cultural Revolution. It is against this background that Hoo-zany is claiming that his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ were valued so much that Jungle Dissanaike ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-stoleƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ ( DidnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t I tell you Jungle that he will let you down?) the Hoo-zany reports from the Foreign Ministry and showed them to JRJ. What astounding revelations he made in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ to the Foreign Ministry is something that will be valued even now if he has the capacity to prove it.

My guess is that without knowing Chinese, without knowing any in the Central Committee of the Communist Party or even in the middle or lower rungs of Party, and with only peripheral contacts with those in Peking at the time (perhaps, the Chinese cleaners on the roads) he could have only copied from other newspaper reports and magazines and sent his dispatches as original reports of his own. This is what most mediocre diplomats do in their spare time to prove that they have been busy working for the nation. Perhaps, Hoo-zany can prove me wrong by revealing some of his sensational diplomatic discoveries in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. If Jungle had ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-stolenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ the documents, as he says, then his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ must be in the public domain by now. So there can be no restrictions in releasing a few Hoo-zany-leaks at this stage to prove his case. If Hoo-zany could at least reveal two or three of his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ revelations of Chinese politics of the time we could at least give some credit to this pin-head.

I must confess that he quotes me accurately when he refers to my questioning ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the great achievements of this baboonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦(i.e, Hoo-zany)ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ However, having read his last response I am compelled to re-describe him more accurately as a mentally perverted and prevaricating pigmy posing as a prodigious pachyderm trumpeting his own delusional achievements. It is his thick skin that is most obnoxious. He doesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t have the basic decency to admit that he was caught lying. His own words were quoted verbatim by me and juxtaposed to prove that by his own admission in the second statement he had contradicted his first statement of not meeting me, making him a liar in his own words. He bluffs his way out by skipping these embarrassing facts and avoiding any reference to being caught as a liar.

Let me recall how he lied. Initially he said that he never met me on a single occasion face-to-face to have a conversation. His second statement admitted that he met me to ask the favour of getting one of his articles published but that meeting was not long enough to have a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-conversationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. So I asked him whether he met me back-to-back when he had the conversation ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” however long or short it may have been — about getting his article published. Now any decent man would say I am sorry, I did speak to him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” once, twice doesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t matter — and I was lying the first time when I said I didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t meet him a single time face-to-face in my idiotic attempt to get away with a lie. Instead he accuses me of lying that I met him twice. Well, let me give my account of the second meeting. This meeting too sticks in my mind vividly. I remember it because it was to have a chuckle over my coinage of the acronym GAGers to describe the Gamini Dissanayake-Athulathmudali- Gamini Lokuge trio who had ganged up against President Premadasa. He thought it was quite funny.

To recap: This whole issue cropped up when he attempted to deny that he boasted of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats in the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ to me at a diplomatic cocktail in the nineties. In his mendacious attempt to deny that he made the boastful claim he had to deny ever having met me. Then he went into reverse gear and admitted having met me once and blamed G. K. Reddy for having praised him with the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-superlativeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, trying to dissociate with it saying ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-not IƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Diplomats are supposed to lie abroad for the good of the country. But judging from his prevarications I donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t think he can even lie straight in his own bed at home. Perhaps, another sand bath at Bambalawatte beach might ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” just might! ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” straighten his tongue and prevent him from lying through his teeth.

On the issue of G. K. Reddy he is asking me not to denigrate him. To me the UN award-winning T. M. Deen, a distinguished Muslim from Sri Lanka, is far superior to Reddy who, as stated by Hoo-zany, was only an agent hired by the Indian government to report once a year on the proceedings of the UN General Assembly meetings. Deen is more than a journalist visiting UN once a year to report UNGA proceedings. He is the head of the Inter Press Service. He has achieved a status that Reddy never did. Deen is a respected member of the UN press corps. His assessments and commentaries on international relations are widely accepted and respected.

I asked Hoo-zany to get his claim of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ on the basis of presiding over a single press conference endorsed by Deen, a fellow Muslim from Sri Lanka. But in an off-handish dismissal he refused to accept Deen as an impartial referee. He still prefers to rely on Reddy who had written a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-superlativeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ certificate of his good conduct at the press conference in 1971. So far only Reddy had done so and Hoo-zany is gloating in a majority of one.

But the big issue is why Hoo-zany who jumps up defending Muslim causes refusing to accept the verdict of a distinguished member of his community and rely on Reddy from India. Why is Hoo-zany shying away from asking a member of his own community to judge his performance based on his claims? DoesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he trust other Muslims? Or is he scared of the judgment of his own community? In rejecting Deen isnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he disgracing his own community? He is accusing me of being anti-Muslim. Readers can judge for themselves as to who is dismissing Muslims as people who do not count in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ judgment.

Of course, Hoo-zany has to depend on Reddy because there is no one else to boost him. As I said earlier, not a single of his colleagues in the Foreign Ministry has come forward to defend him. As a last resort, he has quoted Nihal Rodrigo, the diplomat, who completed his distinguished career as the Secretary-General of SAARC. Nihal had quite diplomatically stated that Hussain ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-was primarily responsible for the balanced approach of the initial draft Colombo Declaration eventually adopted with some amendments which did not substantially change its thrust.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚

Nihal was factual and, in cricketing terms, he has held a straight bat and let the ball dribble down the pitch. He did not, for instance, go out of his way to whack a six for Hoo-zany and declare that he was responsible for making the policy decision at the highest level to pursue a balanced approach. The broad policy line was laid out firmly by Felix who was then the king pin of formulating domestic and foreign policies. Hoo-zany was just another apparatchik in the Foreign Ministry who was there to carry out whatever policy was enunciated by his political masters.

However, Hoo-zany recites the five-point instructions given to him by his boss, W. T. Jayasinghe, as if the entire burden of formulating policy and implementing it was left in his hands. Drafting a resolution based on the policy laid down by the political masters is a routine role of all the back-room hacks in any foreign office and Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s task was no different. By Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s own account he confirms that it was routine bureaucratic exercise that occurs in any administration day in day out. According to Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s story Jayasinghe, his boss, summoned him and placed the NAM brief in the administrative cart and tied Ho-zany to the yoke and whipped him to pull the cart. And by all accounts it is quite obvious that Hoo-zany had done the donkey work obediently and efficiently. ThatƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s all there is to it. This happens every day in every foreign office in any part of the world.

Knowing this, Nihal, quite wisely acknowledged the work of his immediate boss, Hoo-zany, but did not go out of his way to announce that. Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s contribution made him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, did he, eh? Of course, if there is something missing in this story of Hoo-zany he can still correct it by requesting Nihal to declare that he was the greatest. That will certainly clinch the argument one way or the other and I will gladly bow to it if NihalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s assessment concludes by saying that Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s donkey work deserves to be ranked among to top five diplomats of the world. Hoo-zany has already dragged Reddy, Jungle and Nihal and the latter, of course, have maintained a dignified silence. I concede that the dead canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t speak on his behalf. But if Hoo-zany canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t make the living speak on his behalf then he must stop bragging about his fictitious achievements which exists only in his infantile imagination.

The fundamental issue facing him is to prove that he has achieved something great to be rated as ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, as he claims. How does he compare his drafting of a resolution or presiding over a single press conference ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” both of which are routine jobs of back room hacks in any department ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” with the single act of Mohammed Bouazizi, the humble Tunisian fruit-seller, who ignited the historic Arab revolution? The whole world has heard of Bouazizi but who on earth has heard this mendacious bluffer, Hoo-zany? Can he ever achieve, even if he presides over hundred press conferences, what Bouazizi achieved in his humble way in Tunis?

Compare also Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s administrative work of drafting a resolution, according to instructions given to him from those at the top, with that of Rusin Abdulgani, Secretary-General of the Indonesian Foreign Ministry, who did the foundational work of setting up NAM at Bandung in 1955. It was a path-breaking achievement. Working in uncharted waters he launched the new ship of NAM in rather turbulent seas to the acclaim of the whole world. Nowhere did he claim that he was among the five great diplomats in the world because he established and steered the Third Force to stand up, with head held high, in between the two most powerful blocs in global politics of the day. Compared to this how does the drafting of a resolution, according to brief given by those on top, stands in any sensible manƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s assessment? Emily Dickinson described the mentality of Hoo-zany succinctly when she wrote in two neat lines: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Success is counted sweetest / By those who neƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢er succeed at all.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚

I can bet my bottom dollar that Hoo-zany will start waffling again in his next reply. I first called him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Then he repeats the charge of madness against me. I called him a liar substantiating it with proof. He repeats that charge without any proof. He makes desperate bids to use invectives without either substance or style. He is obviously punching above his weight. This is not only pathetic it is also very tiresome and is taking us nowhere. In short, his attempts to bucket me have failed.

No wonder he has conceded that I am ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s greatest bucketeerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. This is rare occasion where he has spotted greatness in another. Normally he devotes all his time boasting about his greatness. With the superlative ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-greatestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ he has acknowledged that there is no one greater than me in bucketing. Well, if he is prepared to elevate me to the peak of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s greatest bucketeerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ I am prepared to accept it gracefully even though it comes from a man who is third rate in the art of bucketing.

Besides, a journalist with the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-greatestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ skills in bucketing must have some standing in journalism unlike an ex-diplomat whose claim for greatness has not been recognized by even his own colleagues. I thank Hoo-zany for ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-thrusting greatness upon meƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and may I also add that it is charlatans, humbugs, academic frauds, voodoo theoreticians, con artists in NGOs laughing all the way to the banks, moral hypocrites, political pariahs, imbecilic intellectuals, bluffers, boasters, and pompous asses, who go bananas each time they miss a sand bath on the due date in the nearest beach, or a sand dune that make my job of bucketing so easy and enjoyable.

So please donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t fail to turn up next Sunday, Hoo-zany. Mind you, if you donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t turn up whoƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s there to provide some comic relief in the week-ends for the readers of LAKBIMA NEWS and, of course, to me?

 

 

 

 

H. L. D. Mahindapala

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Anyone reading Izeth Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s replies critically will agree with the saying that the more a baboon tries to climb higher the more he reveals his butt, not to mention the other oscillating parts of the lower anatomy. He is an unabashed exhibitionist flashing from roof tops his vulgar ego as he makes a desperate bid to recycle his perennial obsession of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the world.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ All of his replies can be summarized as advertisements written by Hoo-zany, for Hoo-zany emphasizing how great Hoo-zany was in the diplomatic world. His ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Me- Me-MeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ theme comes out loud and clear in his kohay-da-yannay-mallay-pol responses. Consequently, he becomes an easy target and I make no apologies for bucketing him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” not because he is a Muslim, as he claims, but to expose him as a charlatan who imagines that he has been a shaker and mover of the Non-aligned movement in 1971.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Not surprisingly, he does the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Me-Me-MeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ thing again in his latest reply. For instance, he claims that he ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-was chosen for that (Peking) posting because of the exceptional quality of my political reporting in Manila. My top secret reports from Peking were stolen from the Foreign Ministry by Jungle Dissanaike and were read by J.R.J and others, but I donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t want to go into all that.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Of course, he wraps himself in the mystique of a diplomatic shaman (or is it sham-man?) and in this instance he praises his own quality of reporting as something ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

So what could have been that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, as claimed by him, in the political reporting of Hoo-zany from Manila? First, if it was that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ why are his replies in LAKBIMA NEWS so mediocre? Second, all of us who have read the Wikileak reports on Sri Lanka, written by American ambassadors, can easily get a taste of what diplomats send back home in their diplomatic pouches. What is striking in each Wikileak is the attitude of the American ambassadors to the local events and personalities and not the contents, most of which are common knowledge. Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s reports could not be any different from that of the American ambassadors, if there was any valuable substance in them at all. But when Hoo-zany claims that his reports are ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ he seems to be placing himself, as usual, above all other diplomats except the unnamed five he cites for vain claims of his non-existent greatness. My guess is that his reports could not have been anything more than cut-and-paste from Manila newspapers. Well, if I am wrong he can prove his case by producing some samples of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ reporting, no?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Besides, any senior journalist, moving in diplomatic circles, will tell you how they are invited for dinners and lunches by ambassadors and intelligence officers to pick their brains. Like journalists the diplomats too are after information and they too are after scoops to inform their home offices of valuable intelligence for their decision-makers to act before other nations get wind of new developments and stymie their moves on the international chess board. Information is power and getting it first is important as interpreting the information.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Wikileak reports reveal that the American diplomats have picked the brains of the local political class and written reports to keep the State Department informed of the latest Sri Lankan events that might affect their national interests. The reports of the American ambassadors reveal that their reports are no better than that of a good journalist, except that it is written by the American ambassadors, the chief reporter for the American government.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

So is Hoo-zany claiming that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the exceptional quality of (his) political reportingƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ was earth-shattering, or better than that of any intelligent journalist? In fact, by his own admission Hoo-zany affirms that the reports of journalists like G. K. Reddy were valued by the Indian government more than that of the Indian diplomats. Hoo-zany commendation of Reddy confirm that if we had hired a competent journalist in Manila when Hoo-zany was there we could have closed down the embassy and saved a lot of taxpayersƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ money.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Also his claim to be an ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ diplomat based on his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reports from Peking (which) were stolen from the Foreign Ministry by Jungle Dissanaike and were read by J.R.J and othersƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ is as hilarious his other claims of his greatness. I cannot comment on those papers because I have not read them. But for him to claim that he produced such ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptional top secret reports from PekingƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ in 1972 ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” a time when the closed society of China was an indecipherable conundrum — must have been indeed remarkable because the best of Western analysts, pouring millions into their intelligence networks, were breaking their necks to penetrate the inscrutable Chinese Wall of secrecy with hardly any success.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Besides, in the 1970s China was in the throes of internal and external turmoil. The Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) was at its peak. The ping-pong diplomacy of Henry Kissinger had resulted in Richard Nixon shaking hands with Mao in Peking. The Sino-Soviet split was also at its intense peak feeding internal party divisions. The armies of Red brigades with little Mao Red books were turning China upside down. No one was quite certain or clear as to what was happening in China. Anyone who could have got an insight into the inscrutable politics of China was highly valued in academic, political, diplomatic and journalistic circles.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

I remember when Dudley SenanayakeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s ambassador to China, Robert Gunawardena, who was on a short break in Colombo, decided to deliver a lecture on the Cultural Revolution, the Red Cross Hall down Turret Road (I think?) was overflowing. Even the American Embassy sent one of its officers to take down notes. The expectation was to get at least a glimpse of the events shaking China. RobertƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s speech was a disappointment because he was mouthing Chinese propaganda instead of analyzing the mysteries of the Cultural Revolution. It is against this background that Hoo-zany is claiming that his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ were valued so much that Jungle Dissanaike ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-stoleƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ ( DidnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t I tell you Jungle that he will let you down?)ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  the Hoo-zany reports from the Foreign Ministry and showed them to JRJ. What astounding revelations he made in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ to the Foreign Ministry is something that will be valued even now if he has the capacity to prove it.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

My guess is that without knowing Chinese, without knowing any in the Central Committee of the Communist Party or even in the middle or lower rungs of Party, and with only peripheral contacts with those in Peking at the time (perhaps, the Chinese cleaners on the roads) he could have only copied from other newspaper reports and magazines and sent his dispatches as original reports of his own. This is what most mediocre diplomats do in their spare time to prove that they have been busy working for the nation. Perhaps, Hoo-zany can prove me wrong by revealing some of his sensational diplomatic discoveries in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. If Jungle had ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-stolenƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ the documents, as he says, then his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-top secret reportsƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ must be in the public domain by now. So there can be no restrictions in releasing a few Hoo-zany-leaks at this stage to prove his case. If Hoo-zany could at least reveal two or three of his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ revelations of Chinese politics of the time we could at least give some credit to this pin-head.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

I must confess that he quotes me accurately when he refers to my questioning ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the great achievements of this baboonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚¦(i.e, Hoo-zany)ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ However, having read his last response I am compelled to re-describe him more accurately as a mentally perverted and prevaricating pigmy posing as a prodigious pachyderm trumpeting his own delusional achievements. It is his thick skin that is most obnoxious. He doesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t have the basic decency to admit that he was caught lying. His own words were quoted verbatim by me and juxtaposed to prove that by his own admission in the second statement he had contradicted his first statement of not meeting me, making him a liar in his own words. He bluffs his way out by skipping these embarrassing facts and avoiding any reference to being caught as a liar.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Let me recall how he lied. Initially he said that he never met me on a single occasion face-to-face to have a conversation. His second statement admitted that he met me to ask the favour of getting one of his articles published but that meeting was not long enough to have a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-conversationƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. So I asked him whether he met me back-to-back when he had the conversation ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” however long or short it may have been — about getting his article published. Now any decent man would say I am sorry, I did speak to him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” once, twice doesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t matter — and I was lying the first time when I said I didnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t meet him a single time face-to-face in my idiotic attempt to get away with a lie. Instead he accuses me of lying that I met him twice. Well, let me give my account of the second meeting. This meetingƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ too sticks in my mind vividly. I remember it because it was to have a chuckle over my coinage of the acronym GAGers to describe the Gamini Dissanayake-Athulathmudali- Gamini Lokuge trio who had ganged up against President Premadasa. He thought it was quite funny.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

To recap: This whole issue cropped up when he attempted to deny that he boasted of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats in the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ to me at a diplomatic cocktail in the nineties. In his mendacious attempt to deny that he made the boastful claim he had to deny ever having met me. Then he went into reverse gear and admitted having met me once and blamed G. K. Reddy for having praised him with the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-superlativeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, trying to dissociate with it saying ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-not IƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Diplomats are supposed to lie abroad for the good of the country. But judging from his prevarications I donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t think he can even lie straight in his own bed at home. Perhaps, another sand bath at Bambalawatte beach might ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” just might! ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” straighten his tongue and prevent him from lying through his teeth.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

On the issue of G. K. Reddy he is asking me not to denigrate him. To me the UN award-winning T. M. Deen, a distinguished Muslim from Sri Lanka, is far superior toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  Reddy who, as stated by Hoo-zany, was only an agent hired by the Indian government to report once a year on the proceedings of the UN General Assembly meetings. Deen is more than a journalist visiting UN once a year to report UNGA proceedings. He is the head of the Inter Press Service. He has achieved a status that Reddy never did. Deen is a respected member of the UN press corps. His assessments and commentaries on international relations are widely accepted and respected.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

I asked Hoo-zany to get his claim of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ on the basis of presiding over a single press conference endorsed by Deen, a fellow Muslim from Sri Lanka. But in an off-handish dismissal he refused to accept Deen as an impartial referee. He still prefers to rely on Reddy who had written a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-superlativeƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ certificate of his good conduct at the press conference in 1971. So far only Reddy had done so and Hoo-zany is gloating in a majority of one.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

But the big issue is why Hoo-zany who jumps up defending Muslim causes refusing to accept the verdict of a distinguished member of his community and rely on Reddy from India. Why is Hoo-zany shying away from asking a member of his own community to judge his performance based on his claims? DoesnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he trust other Muslims? Or is he scared of the judgment of his own community? In rejecting Deen isnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t he disgracing his own community? He is accusing me of being anti-Muslim. Readers can judge for themselves as to who is dismissing Muslims as people who do not count in his ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exceptionalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ judgment.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Of course, Hoo-zany has to depend on Reddy because there is no one else to boost him. As I said earlier, not a single of his colleagues in the Foreign Ministry has come forward to defend him. As a last resort, he has quoted Nihal Rodrigo, the diplomat, who completed his distinguished career as the Secretary-General of SAARC. Nihal had quite diplomatically stated that Hussain ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-was primarily responsible for the balanced approach of the initial draft Colombo Declaration eventually adopted with some amendments which did not substantially change its thrust.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Nihal was factual and, in cricketing terms, he has held a straight bat and let the ball dribble down the pitch. He did not, for instance, go out of his way to whack a six for Hoo-zany and declare that he was responsible for making the policy decision at the highest level to pursue a balanced approach. The broad policy line was laid out firmly by Felix who was then the king pin of formulating domestic and foreign policies. Hoo-zany was just another apparatchik in the Foreign Ministry who was there to carry out whatever policy was enunciated by his political masters.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

However, Hoo-zany recites the five-point instructions given to him by his boss, W. T. Jayasinghe, as if the entire burden of formulating policy and implementing it was left in his hands. Drafting a resolution based on the policy laid down by the political masters is a routine role of all the back-room hacks in any foreign office and Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s task was no different. By Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s own account he confirms that it was routine bureaucratic exercise that occurs in any administration day in day out. According to Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s story Jayasinghe, his boss, summoned him and placed the NAM brief in the administrative cart and tied Ho-zany to the yoke and whipped him to pull the cart. And by all accounts it is quite obvious that Hoo-zany had done the donkey work obediently and efficiently. ThatƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s all there is to it. This happens every day in every foreign office in any part of the world.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Knowing this, Nihal, quite wisely acknowledged the work of his immediate boss, Hoo-zany, but did not go out of his way to announce that. Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s contribution made him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, did he, eh? Of course, if there is something missing in this story of Hoo-zany he can still correct it by requesting Nihal to declare that he was the greatest. That will certainly clinch the argument one way or the other and I will gladly bow to it if NihalƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s assessment concludes by saying that Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s donkey work deserves to be ranked among to top five diplomats of the world. Hoo-zany has already dragged Reddy, Jungle and Nihal and the latter, of course, have maintained a dignified silence. I concede that the dead canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t speak on his behalf. But if Hoo-zany canƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t make the living speak on his behalf then he must stop bragging about his fictitious achievements which exists only in his infantile imagination.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

The fundamental issue facing him is to prove that he has achieved something great to be rated as ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-one of the five great diplomats of the worldƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚, as he claims. How does he compare his drafting of a resolution or presiding over a single press conference ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” both of which are routine jobs of back room hacks in any department ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢¢”š¬…” with the single act of Mohammed Bouazizi, the humble Tunisian fruit-seller, who ignited the historic Arab revolution? The whole world has heard of Bouazizi but who on earth has heard this mendacious bluffer, Hoo-zany? Can he ever achieve, even if he presides over hundred press conferences, what Bouazizi achieved in his humble way in Tunis?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Compare also Hoo-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s administrative work of drafting a resolution, according to instructions given to him from those at the top, with that of Rusin Abdulgani, Secretary-General of the Indonesian Foreign Ministry, who did the foundational work of setting up NAM at Bandung in 1955. It was a path-breaking achievement. Working in uncharted waters he launched the new ship of NAM in rather turbulent seas to the acclaim of the whole world. Nowhere did he claim that he was among the five great diplomats in the world because he established and steered the Third Force to stand up, with head held high, in between the two most powerful blocs in global politics of the day. Compared to this how does the drafting of a resolution, according to brief given by those on top, stands in any sensible manƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s assessment? Emily Dickinson described the mentality of Hoo-zany succinctly when she wrote in two neat lines: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Success is counted sweetest / By those who neƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢er succeed at all.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

I can bet my bottom dollar that Hoo-zany will start waffling again in his next reply. I first called him ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-zanyƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Then he repeats the charge of madness against me. I called him a liar substantiating it with proof. He repeats that charge without any proof. He makes desperate bids to use invectives without either substance or style. He is obviously punching above his weight. This is not only pathetic it is also very tiresome and is taking us nowhere. In short, his attempts to bucket me have failed.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

No wonder he has conceded that I am ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s greatest bucketeerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. This is rare occasion where he has spotted greatness in another. Normally he devotes all his time boasting about his greatness. With the superlative ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-greatestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ he has acknowledged that there is no one greater than me in bucketing. Well, if he is prepared to elevate me to the peak of being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s greatest bucketeerƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ I am prepared to accept it gracefully even though it comes from a man who is third rate in the art of bucketing.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

Besides, a journalist with the ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-greatestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ skills in bucketing must have some standing in journalism unlike an ex-diplomat whose claim for greatness has not been recognized by even his own colleagues. I thank Hoo-zany for ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-thrusting greatness upon meƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ and may I also add that it is charlatans, humbugs, academic frauds, voodoo theoreticians, con artists in NGOs laughing all the way to the banks, moral hypocrites, political pariahs, imbecilic intellectuals, bluffers, boasters, and pompous asses, who go bananas each time they miss a sand bath on the due date in the nearest beach, or a sand dune thatmake my job of bucketing so easy and enjoyable.

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ 

So please donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t fail to turn up next Sunday, Hoo-zany. Mind you,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚  if you donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t turn up whoƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s there to provide some comic relief in the week-ends for the readers of LAKBIMA NEWS and, of course, to me?

ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚