US Resolution and heavy weights bullying Sri Lanka !
Posted on March 28th, 2014

P.A.Samaraweera, Melbourne

The US, UK and Canada, with all their power and might could muster only 23 votes at the UNHRC session – one less than 2012 and two less than 2013. Twelve voted against the Resolution while 12 others abstained. Therefore, as a whole there are 24 against the Resolution. As such, the sponsors and the co-sponsors of the Resolution cannot be that happy. With the massive campaign conducted by the US, UK, Canada and the LTTE rump, their expectation was 35 votes. The biggest shock and disbelief to the Resolution sponsors was the abstention of India. Political scientists consider this as a setback for the US. And then, with all the pressure brought by Navi Pillai, who is well known for her bias attitude, South Africa had abstained. Many had claimed that they voted for the Resolution because of the funding they get from the west.

So the last minute surprise and good news for Sri Lanka was the stand taken by India. The Indian delegate had said, ‘…An external investigation mechanism would hinder the efforts of Sri Lanka to promote reconciliation…This imposes an intrusive approach and is counter productive…’ However, the whole episode in Sri Lanka about terrorism and war is due to the role played by India. At the beginning, India nurtured, funded and trained the terrorists.

With all the drumming done by the US and sponsor countries, the results of the voting had not improved by leaps and bounds. Therefore,  the sponsors of the Resolution have taken it lying low. So far the voting pattern in the past had been, 24 votes for the US Resolution in 2012 with 15 against and 8 abstaining. In 2013, there were 25 votes for the US with 13 against and 8 abstaining. In 2014, those in favour of the Resolution had dropped to 23 while there had been 12 against  with 12 abstentions. So minnow Sri Lanka had performed well against Goliath US. For the LTTE rump, Tamil diaspora, NGO’s and people like Navi Pillai, Rayappah Joseph etc the results are more a disappointment.

However, for Sri Lanka, except the last minute shocking development from India, this is not much of a surprise. Sri Lanka from the beginning had stood against the heavy weights and categorically rejected the Resolution as it challenges the Sovereignty and Independence of the country. President Mahinda Rajapakse had said that the US sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka and the vote on it will be of no significance. He had added that the govt was not concerned about the resolution as it was nothing new from the UN Human Rights Council. The President did not heed the requests of the west during the height of the war. Their main grudge is for this!

6 Responses to “US Resolution and heavy weights bullying Sri Lanka !”

  1. stanley perera Says:

    Sitting on the fence is not good enough India. Sri Lanka still cannot call India is Sri Lanka’s friend. In that scenario China and Pakistan are our true friends. Friends in need. South Africa is now moderate. Thank you South Africa. There must be more vigourous personal attacks on that toilet cleaner Pillai woman the scum of the earth. SL must deny visa to stinking Pillai woman.

  2. Lorenzo Says:

    So we are fooled by Endia again!!

    Endia betrayed us again.

    COMPARE Endia with China and Pakistan – they voted AGAINST the resolution.

    This is what we want.

  3. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha Says:

    The ONLY REASON India did not vote against Sri Lanka is due to the UK pushing for a comprehensive International investigation. Usually such investigations have to go through the Security Council but UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon bypassed the Security Council by setting up a separate body to do what should first pass through the Security Council.

    India refused to sign onto this “comprehensive international investigation” unless it was limited to the period between 2002 to 2009. Colombo insisted any such investigation has to cover the entire war which would have also included the human rights violations commited by the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) when they were in Sri Lanka and took on the Tamil Tigers loosing one thousand six hundred soldiers. The massive human rights commited by the IPKF were so severe that the Indian press refused to cover it.

    Had India voted against Sri Lanka then the demand by the British Prime Minister Cameron would have also taken effect. Colombo would have resisted since it would require Sri Lanka’s permission to carry out such an investigation and because it was only limited to the period of 2002-2009. The UK was so determined that Sri Lanka be investigated that the chance of investigating the entire war as demanded by Colombo would have become the nightmare India definitely wanted to avoid.

    Such a comprehensive investigations would have not only addressed the human rights violations of the IPKF but thrown open the doors to various expat Indian communities that have petitioned the UN for similar such investigations. Communities such as the global Sikhs, the global Indian Muslims and other Expat Indians such as the Assamese would have opened a Pandora’s box of human rights violations against India’s military, including slavery (India is home to half the world’s slaves or 14 million of them), the condition of the Dalits, child labor, the rising tide of rape, to an relentless list of other human rights violations in India’s society.

  4. Marco Says:

    Minutes after the UNHRC vote in Geneva on Sri Lanka, where Russia voted against the resolution, the United Nations General Assembly in New York, adopts a resolution, “calling upon states NOT to recognize a change in status of the Crimea region” in short NOT accepting Russian Annexation or Crimean Independence!

    There were 100 Votes for the resolution, 11 against and 58 abstentions, with another 24 not turning up to the debate and are marked as absent. Sri Lanka is either absent or abstained.

    The Countries that voted with Russia and against the resolution are: Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, North Korea, Nicaragua, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Zimbabwe

    I wonder how Russia feel that SL did not vote with them on this

  5. Lorenzo Says:

    USA attacks UNHRC over anti-Israel resolutions!!!

    “The United States on Friday issued a scathing attack against the United Nations Human Rights Council on Friday for its continued biased treatment of Israel and charged that the council was harming the peace process.

    America was the sole country to vote against five anti-Israel resolutions with the UNHRC approved on Friday afternoon as it met in Geneva at the close of its 25th session.

    Four of the five resolutions attacked Israel’s treatment of Palestinians over the pre-1967 lines and were approved 46 to 1.

    The fifth resolution that dealt with Israel’s continued presence on the Golan Heights, and its treatment of the Syrian population that lives there, passed with the approval of 33 nations. There were 13 abstentions and one vote against it.

    The US took particular issue with the council’s Agenda Item 7, which mandates that Israel must be debated at every UNHRC session. Israel is the only country with such a standing agenda item.

    “We are deeply troubled once again to be presented with a slate of one sided resolutions that undermine efforts to make progress in the negotiations,” said Paula Schriefer, who heads the US Delegation to the UNHRC.

    She noted in particular that the US remains “deeply troubled by the council’s stand alone agenda item directed against Israel and by the many repetitive and one sided resolutions under this agenda item.”

    “None of the world’s worst human rights violators, some of whom are the objects of resolutions at this session have their own stand alone agenda item at this council,” Schriefer said.

    “Only Israel, a vibrant and open democracy, received such treatment,” Schriefer said.

    “Especially disturbing is this council complacency with the repeated introduction of a resolution focusing on the Golan Heights,” said Schriefer.

    “To consider such a resolution while the Syrian regime continues to slaughter its own citizens exemplified the absurdity of this agenda item and each of the other resolution on Agenda item 7,” Schriefer said.

    She explained that the US supported the Palestinian’s right to self determination but that it did not believe these resolutions helped advance a two state solution or the peaceful resolution of the conflict.

    Schriefer noted that the US provided financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian people and was the largest donor to UNRWA.

    The Foreign Ministry was not present at the council meeting due to its ongoing strike.”


    How true about SL!! USA repeatedly attacks SL at the UNHRC but when others bring 5 RESOLUTIONS against Israel and pass it USA gets spikes up its arse.


    Karma! Karma!

    5 times!!

  6. Marco Says:

    Soon after the adoption of the US backed resolution on Sri Lanka, the UNHRC overwhelmingly approved not 1 but 5 resolutions against Israel. The US (heavy weight bully) could not persuade a single UNHRC member to vote against the anti- Israeli resolutions, not even its ally in crime, the UK. 46 out of the 47 members voted for the resolutions with only US voting against it. Where was the bully boy funding tactics?
    So much for the lie that the UNHRC is an imperialist pawn or that US can influence and manipulate the UNHRC members by bullying them.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.



Copyright © 2024 All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress