Is Nandasena Doing a Sirisena at the UNHRC Sessions in 2021?
Posted on March 17th, 2021

By Citizen Perera 

Sirisena’s betrayal 

‘Nandasena started where Sirisena ended.’ That is the perception in the minds of many people in the country, today. 

Sirisena betrayed the country and her soldiers in 2015 when he co-sponsored an anti-Sri Lankan Resolution containing the usual invective and unsubstantiated accusations, disgorged regularly from the poop-houses in Washington.    

Sirisena is considered today a traitor by most, if not all, Sri Lankans and history will condemn him so. 

Is Nandasena back-stabbing Dinesh? 

Where is Nandasena hoping to pitch his tent in 2021 when the UNHRC takes up the anti-Sri Lankan proposal tabled by CORE?”  

The grapevine has it that Nandasena is attempting to sidestep the issue of asking the Non-Aligned Bloc to second and support Foreign Minister Gunawardena’s proposal to reject outright the CORE proposal.     

If Nandasena fails to mobilise the friendly countries in the HRC chamber, the anti Sri Lankan proposal will be adopted unanimously, by default. 

War heroes sacrificed 

If Nandasena co-sponsors or agrees to a consensual resolution or is a party in any way to the anti- Sri Lankan proposal being adopted unanimously by the UNHRC, for the want of the Chair not-calling for a vote, it would be a clear signal that Nandasena is pitching his tent alongside Sirisena.  

Such a move would signal Nandasena’s intention of collaborating with America to betray Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and her war heroes; the soldiers would be extradited to America and incarcerated in their prisons, any time the Americans so determine. Some perhaps to be even incinerated in their chairs. 

Such a move would also mean that Nandasena has collaborated with the Americans to permit American soldiers to peremptorily and unilaterally invade Sri Lanka, if America decides that Sri Lanka’s actions threaten American interests or if the Americans determine that Sri Lanka’s resources are vital for America to achieve its objectives. 

Carte blanche for American military interventions  

And it would also mean that Nandasena has diabolically consented to betray our friends in the Non-Aligned Movement and elsewhere, by allowing a villainous concept to become etched into International law by precedence, which would empower America to unilaterally invade any Sovereign Nation in the world, at any time the Americans decide to do so.   

This is the effectual gist of the CORE proposal based on Bachelet’s dubious Report. 

All the above would happen, if Sri Lanka fails to initiate action to have Dinesh Gunawardena’s proposal seconded by a friendly country. Such a course of action only, would force the Chair of the UNHRC to call for a vote.  

The question being angrily tossed about these days is, Is Nandasena deliberately side-stepping the issue of asking the Non-Aligned Bloc to Second and support Gunawardena’s proposal to reject the CORE proposal, the preliminary and mandatory step for a vote to be taken?”  

If the Non-Aligned Movement is mobilised to Second and support Dinesh Gunawardena’s outright rejection of the CORE proposal, it would compel the HRC Chair to call for a vote, preventing the disastrous consequences of adopting unanimously a ‘Consensual’ Resolution, when no vote could ever be taken. 

Bachelet and Nandasena agree Sri Lanka is a failed State? 

If the CORE Resolution is adopted unanimously, for the want of a vote not being taken, it would mean that Nandasena has accepted the position, indicated by Bachelet, that Sri Lanka by her actions has demonstrated its inability and unwillingness to pursue a meaningful path towards accountability for international crimes and serious human rights violations.”   

If the CORE proposal is adopted unanimously, without a vote, what Nandasena is broadcasting to the world is ‘Yes, I agree, Sri Lanka is a failed State. American intervention is necessary’  

Are our heroic soldiers war criminals? 

People demand from Nandasena, Tell us loud and clear, is this the position you are taking? Are you telling the world (by accepting the Bachelet Report) that Sri Lanka is a failed State? Are you telling the world community that Sri Lanka’s soldiers committed international crimes and are in breach of serious Human Rights violations?  

Is Sri Lanka surrendering? 

Colombage, the controversial Secretary in the Foreign Ministry, said in that interview with Raymond, We are not willing to surrender without a fight.”  

Since Nandasena has not refuted this widely publicised statement, it is presumed that Nandasena endorses this view.  

What does Colombage mean therefore by saying ‘not willing to surrender without a fight’? The operative word is ‘SURRENDER’.  

Rephrased, Colombage’s statement would read, ‘We are willing to surrender; only after a fight’. 

Has Colombage once again, by a Freudian slip, let the cat out of the bag? He is saying that ‘surrender’ is an option and that Nandasena has endorsed it. Perhaps, the talks going on with the Enemy (the CORE group) to change some of the wording of the Resolution, is the ‘mock’ fight that is going on, before we surrender.  

Even one vote for Sri Lanka is a victory for all sovereign States  

No one in the Government or Opposition has spoken against or about the insidious concepts neatly concealed in the Bachelet Report; these dangerous, precedent-setting concepts would change the World Order for good and permit unilateral American military intervention anywhere in the world; this, only if the CORE proposal were adopted unanimously. Even if there were only one vote in our favour, a very unlikely situation in the context of 35 NAM countries being in the HRC, it is a victory for the free world. 

So, what is this talk about ‘surrender’? Sri Lanka’s actions could only be construed as surrender, if she allows the CORE-proposal to be adopted unanimously, by consensus. 

What is Nandasena upto? Is Nandasena doing a Sirisena? 

Surrender is not in the vocabulary of the Sri Lanka Army 

It is a disgrace that a former military officer like Nandasena, whether average or less so, is even considering ‘Surrender’. That word is not in the vocabulary of the Sri Lanka Army. Ask Sarath Fonseka, he will vouch for that.  

The Sri Lankan Army, when engaged in a defensive battle with an Enemy whose firepower and manpower are superior by far to the Army, there is never a  question of surrender; they fight and defend their position to the end, dying if needs be with their boots on.  

That is the ethos of the Sri Lanka Army they fight to a ‘last-man-last-bullet’.  

 And what a disgrace this Colombage chap is! 

5 Responses to “Is Nandasena Doing a Sirisena at the UNHRC Sessions in 2021?”

  1. Gunasinghe Says:

    Please stop writing nonsense. Even we do not get enough votes, what can they do. You are trying to mislead public by spreading falls information to tarnish the DR’s reputation. Stop acting like jerks. GR never betray our war heroes. Keep your opinions to your self.

  2. DR M D P DISSANAYAKE Says:

    The above comments from PORTUGESE AND SPANISH “PEAR TREE” DISGUSTING. THESE GUY
    S ARE LOOKING FOR WAY AND MEANS OF CREATING UNWANTED ISSUES.

  3. DR M D P DISSANAYAKE Says:

    The above comments from PORTUGESE AND SPANISH “PEAR TREE” DISGUSTING. THESE GUY
    S ARE LOOKING FOR WAY AND MEANS OF CREATING UNWANTED ISSUES.

  4. Vaisrawana Says:

    Citizen Perera, you are trying to feed the anti-Sri Lanka frenzy that is doing its damnedest to pillory Sri Lanka at Geneva. You are doing that to settle some personal score with Gotabaya at the expense of our beloved Mother Land. This is despicable! False propaganda is the most harmful weapon that Sri Lanka bashers are wielding against GR/Sri Lanka.

    QUOTE

    “What does Colombage mean therefore by saying ‘not willing to surrender without a fight’? The operative word is ‘SURRENDER’.

    Rephrased, Colombage’s statement would read, ‘We are willing to surrender; only after a fight’.

    END OF QUOTE

    “WHAT A SILLY, SPECIOUS ARGUMENT! Citizen Perera.

    No problem for us Gotabaya supporters with your Gotabaya hatred, Citizen Perera. The phrase ‘not willing to surrender without a fight’, as you should know, does not mean what you say it means here. Colombage is just talking about the desperate situation that the Sri Lankan delegates are wading through at Geneva at the moment. You need some imagination and knowledge to visualize it. He is only expressing his team’s determination to do whatever it takes to rescue our country from the trap that the Yahapalanaya’s Mangala led her to without consulting the president (a pambaya though MS was) and the cabinet of ministers of the time (of course, he was most probably acting on the instructions of a bigger Crook).

    Winning when all odds are against one in every way makes one a hero. Colombage is proposing such a heroic venture. He no doubt enjoys Gota’s trust. GR proved that he himself is a hero in that sense when serving as a soldier and was commended by his General and had reached the rank of Colonel by the time of his voluntary retirement after two eventful decades in the army. A cowardly eunuch can never be a hero. GR will never betray Mother Lanka. Dr Colombage is himself a war hero. He is a former admiral as is well known. He is said to be a Born Again Christian alright, but that is his personal life, and if it is an issue at all, it is separate from his professional life.

  5. Charles Says:

    This chap writing under Citizen Perera is a Vijitha Tennekoon. He had sent this to me as an email and asked him to get off my back.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

 

 


Copyright © 2023 LankaWeb.com. All Rights Reserved. Powered by Wordpress