The
Swiss profited from Nazism; banking gold stolen by occupied nations and
holocaust victims. When Hitler began his
reign of terror the first thing the Swiss did was to pass laws to guarantee
anonymity to anyone transferring their savings to a Swiss bank. Was it a
plan devised between Hitler and the Swiss, we may never know but Jews sent
their wealth before many ended up ‘missing for ever’ in the torture chambers!
The Jews that remained and wanted to regain their assets were refused entry by
the Swiss. Their heirs who claimed the deposits in Swiss accounts were slapped
with the law of confidentiality & payment was blocked with some Swiss banks
demanding death certificates for those who perished in concentration death
camps! Such was the ‘neutral’ behavior of the Swiss Govt.
Switzerland is renowned for being the
financial refuge for stolen wealth which are protected by bank secrecy laws!
The Tax Justice Network produces a Financial Secrecy Index,
ranking countries for the assistance their legal systems provide, to
money-launderers, and to all people who seek to protect corruptly-obtained
wealth. The higher the score, the more corrupt the government is. The last time
this Index was published, in 2015, Switzerland was rated the world’s
most-corrupt country, and Hong Kong was then #2.
the Swiss will exchange information with rich countries if they have to,
but will continue offering citizens of
poorer countries the opportunity to evade their taxpaying responsibilities.
These factors, along with ongoing aggressive pursuit of financial sector
whistleblowers (resorting at times to what appear to be non-legal methods)
are ongoing reminders of why Switzerland
remains the most important secrecy jurisdiction in the world today.”
According to the Swiss Bankers’ Association banks in Switzerland hold CHF
6.65 trillion ($6.5 trillion) in assets under management, of which 48 percent
originated from abroad: this made
Switzerland the world leader in global cross-border asset management, with a 25
percent share of that market. In terms of the narrower wealth management
sector, Deloitte estimated that Switzerland was also the world leader with
US$2.04 trillion in assets under management in 2014, compared to the $1.65
trillion and $1.43 trillion for the UK and US respectively.”
Switzerland & Nazi Germany Links
For over 70 years
Swiss has been holding wealth not belonging to it. It is alleged that Swiss
records cover only 10% of deposit accounts with the bankers claiming records
got destroyed during normal course of business.
Switzerland also
cannot erase its guilt of taking looted assets of concentration camp victims
and giving Germany hard currency to buy war material from Sweden, Portugal,
Spain, Argentina, Turkey.
In May 7, 1997, a report on the gold
trade between the neutral states and Nazi Germany was published.
Swiss admits holding wealth of Jewish
holocaust victims
The
Swiss National Bank publicly acknowledged it made profits on war time dealings
in gold bullion with German Central Bank to the tune of 20million Swiss Francs.
Swiss
National Bank Vice President Jean-Pierre Roth. Swiss Bank is being accused of
melting the German Reichsbank gold to hide its origin!
”Even
if Germany did steal gold from the countries it occupied and transferred it to
the Swiss central bank, there is nothing to indicate that gold from
concentration camps was among this,”
Jewish
groups are demanding Swiss banks return the billions of dollars of unclaimed
assets belonging to Holocaust victims, many who had put their money in Swiss
banks before the persecution.
Swiss Banks depositories for
politicians’ wealth
Ferdinand
and Imelda Marcos flew into exile in 1986 after rigging too many elections
throughout 21 year rule and having both army & people turn against him.
According to UK Guardian they went into exile carrying 23 wooden crates, 12
suitcases and bags, various boxes that contained clothes to fill 67 racks; 413
pieces of jewellery including 70 pairs of jewel-studded cufflinks; an ivory
statue of the infant Jesus with a silver mantle and a diamond necklace; 24 gold
bricks, inscribed To my husband on our 24th anniversary”; and more than 27m
Philippine pesos in freshly-printed notes. The total value was $15m. The
Philippine Supreme Court, claims the Marcos’s had accumulated up to $10bn while
in office.
The
Marcos’s on 20 March 1968 used false names to deposit $950,000 in four accounts
with Credit Suisse, Marcos as William Saunders (he practised his new signature
on the headed paper), Imelda Marcos as Jane Ryan. By February 1970, the Swiss
accounts were so loaded, the couple added an extra layer of concealment,
transferring their ownership to foundations registered in Liechtenstein.
The Swiss is famous for cheese and chocolates but Swiss are also notorious for banking looted money and protecting that too.
The CID informed the Kurunegala Magistrate Court today that a new investigative team under the supervision of an ASP has been appointed to probe the charges against Dr Shafi.
The case against Dr Shafi for sterilizing mothers at the time of performing caesareans was taken before the court today.
Our correspondent stated that the New Director CID, SSP W Thilakarathna personally appeared before the court to inform the future course of action by the CID.
He told the court that certain factions are not satisfied with the pre-investigations of the matter, therefore, a new team has been appointed under the supervision of an ASP to probe the matter again.<
He also said that the CID investigations should not be subjected to any doubt by any factions, therefore the future investigations would be carried out with full transparency.
The CID Director further informed the court that the charges against Dr Shafi on his financial and other wealth accumulation will be probed separately.
The overseas travel ban imposed on Garnier Banister Francis, the swiss embassy official who claimed to have been abducted has been extended until the 17th of this month.
The Tamil separatist movement was not prepared to take the Eelam war
defeat lying down. The war ended in May 2009. The very next year, TNA called for a day of mourning in May
17.2010 the government objected but the commemoration took place. May 18 became
a day of tension in the North, said the media. May 18 is for them a stark
reminder of all they have lost. The government was celebrating its victory, in
Colombo while prohibiting any public memorial services in the North.
After
Yahapalana took power the Tamil Separatist Movement regained its confidence.
Yahapalana rule saw the rise of an assertive Tamil separatism in the Northern
Province.
In December 2015 the University of Jaffna put
up black flags and posters which deified Prabhakaran and a call for Eelam.
There was a revival of the Pongu Thamil movement. This movement supported the
nationhood of the Tamils, their right to self-determination and the framing of
the North and East regions of Sri Lanka as the Tamil homeland , said analysts.
In
October 2016, the Tamil People’s Council (TPC) staged a protest march and rally
campaign called the Eluga Thamil. ‘Eluga Tamil’ means ‘Rise Up Tamil’. the
Ezhuga Thamil rally called for the return of land, finding missing persons,
release of those detained without trial, resettlement of displaced people and
demilitarization and restoration of full civilian rule. It also had political demands. They wanted a federal constitution, and the
merger of North and East into one large Tamil controlled province.
This was a very successful
protest march and rally. Speakers
asked Tamil people to get on the streets and protest, because sending
representatives to legislative bodies will not win Tamil rights. The rally is
estimated t have drawn the largest crowd after the war. An estimated 10 to
15000 had attended. The rally was supported by the university and the civil
society groups, This means that the intelligentsia of Jaffna were supporting
the rally, said Jehan Perera.
S.I.Keethaponcalan commented on the rally. The campaign was organized
not only to protest about the problems of the Tamil people, but also to kindle
Tamil nationalism. This is exactly what the slogan of Eluga Thamil means. It
asks the Tamil people to rise up. Eluga Thamil type events, which are marked by
nationalist fervor, could turn violent easily. They need only a minor incident,
an ignition, executed by a Tamil nationalist sympathizer or a motivated
opponent. The direction taken by the TPC is
clear, said Keethaponcalan. It is towards radical politics, which could, in the
long run, turn violent.
Tamil Makkal Peravai Organisation held a hartal in 2017, demanding the
merger of the North and East, dismantling of security forces camps in the area
and the right to information about their missing persons. The event was organized by Northern Province Chief
Minister C.V. Wigneswaran. Districts
observed a shutdown. Offices, businesses, schools and public transport came to
a halt. There was a mass rally, in Jaffna. Stones
were thrown at a Vavuniya bound bus carrying army personnel.
In 2018 students of Jaffna
University announced a plan to observe Sri Lanka’s Independence Day on February
4 2018 as a Black Day”, reported the media. Since independence from Britain in
1948 successive Sri Lankan governments have continually denied the Tamils
their legitimate rights and heaped disabilities on them. Black Day will bring
to the attention of the world the fact that since independence from the British
in 1948 and even ten years after the end of the war in the island, successive
Sri Lankan governments have only discriminated against the Tamil people, and
failed to address their basic concerns, they said.
Black day was observed in
2019. The media reported that Led by the
Students Union of Jaffna University, large numbers of men and women in several
major towns wore black armbands or headscarves and demonstrated in
public places demanding the release of lands occupied by the Sri Lankan army,
information about the whereabouts of their missing kin, and justice to Tamils
who were subjected to war crimes” by the Security Forces during the last phase
of the war. Posters called upon the army to leave the Tamil lands.
In the Jaffna University campus,
the Sri Lankan national flag was brought down and a Black Flag was hoisted.
former Chief Minister of the Northern Province C.V.Wigneswaran participated in
a protest at the Kandaswami Hindu temple in Kilinochchi. TNA did not support
the activity. TNA said that Sri Lanka’s Independence Day could not be
considered a Black Day.
Jaffna University students had a major protest on March 2019, to
coincide with UNHRC session in Geneva.
They demand a hybrid court to investigate war crimes allegations against
Sri Lanka. Several vehicles carrying the replicas of ‘war memorial’ built at
the Jaffna University in memory of LTTE cadres paraded the streets.
Vijayakala Maheswaran, State Minister of Child
Affairs, staged a protest of her own. In a speech delivered at the 8th
Presidential Public Service programme titled ‘Nila Mehewera for Northern
Province’ held at the Veerasingham Hall in Jaffna on July 3,2018 Vijayakala Maheswaran called for the return of the LTTE.
Today we realize from our bottom of our heart how proud we are to have
lived under the times of LTTE prior to May 18, 2009. We must resurrect the LTTE in the North and East, if we
want to lead a peaceful life. If our school going children are to return home
safely, the hands of the LTTE should be strengthened. The LTTE must come back for us to live and to be
free,” she said.
Jaffna applauded. There were posters in Jaffna in support of
Vijayakala. There was uproar in Parliament. National Sangha Council asked for
her arrest. Protests against Vijayakala’s statement in Galle, Biyagama, Ampara.
Sinhala Ravaya filed a case against her in Colombo.
Yahapalana government ran to appease the separatists. In 2015 it removed the proscriptions on 8 banned pro
LTTE organizations, British Tamil Forum, Canadian Tamil Congress, Australian Tamil congress, Global Tamil
forum, national council of Eelam Tamils, Tamil National council, Tamil Youth
Organization , and World Tamil Coordinating committee.
Yahapalana government released
32 terrorists held under the PTA. a further 32 will also be released reported
the media in 2015. Top sea Tigress, Pakeerathy
was discharged. She had fled to France in 2000. dangerous LTTE cadres who were deemed by the
previous government to be impossible to rehabilitate, were released without trial
by the present government, observed Chandraprema. it was pardoning and releasing hardcore LTTE cadres. In
2016 the media reported that Yahapalana government had cleared more than 400
people with links to LTTE.
In 2016
a delegation of Sri Lanka ministers met the UK Tamil Diaspora in a public forum
and responded to their concerns. The meeting was organization by the
Nonresident Tamils of Sri Lanka. Harsha de Silva and Rosie Senanayake
participated. Rosie made a public
apology for the 1983 riots.
After Yahapalana took power, the
Northern Provincial Council became bold.
In April 2016 NPC unanimously adopted a resolution for setting up two
states in the island merging North and East in one state. The resolution also
proposed a separate state parliament for the north and east.
There would also be an
autonomous state for the estate Tamils. There would be Muslim majority
districts as autonomous provinces within the state. Muslims opposed this. It is
ridiculous to make language the basis for a re-merger. Muslims have a distinct
religious and cultural identity. There was also a petition in Supreme Court
against this resolution.
A resolution demanding the UN Human Rights
Council to establish a special court in Sri Lanka to probe allegations of war
crimes and human right violations in the North at the last stage of war on
terrorism was also passed by the NPC.
The TNA was courted by the western countries
during Yahapalana rule. The list of foreign official who met the TNA leaders,
Sampanthan and Sumanthiran included, US House of Representatives Armed Services
Committee delegation, led by McClellen Thornberry, visiting US Assistant
Secretary of State, Ambassador Alice Wells
visiting United States member of Congress F. James Sensenbrenner and His
Chief of Staff Matt Bisenius and Rodney Frelinghuysen Chairman, House
Appropriations Committee and Rep. Henry Cuellar.
From UK
cameMinister of State for Asia and
Pacific Mark Field and Members of
Westminster Foundation for Democracy. A delegation
from the European Parliament Committee on International Trade, including the
Standing Rapporteur for South Asia, the visiting Belgium-Sri Lanka
Parliamentary Friendship Group, the visiting Norwegian State Secretary for
Development Cooperation and a senior
Japanese diplomat and United Nations administrator Yasushi Akashi also met the
pair.
TNA leaders Sumanthiran and Sampanthan spent the full Yahapalana
period, (2015-2019) telling fancy stories to these gullible visitors. There was
a glorious return to the old Tamil Separatist arguments. They said the Tamils
are separate nation, the Tamils have a homeland comprising of the northern and
eastern provinces and they are entitled to the right of self-determination.
Before Colonial subjugation, there were Sinhala and Tamil Kingdoms in
the Country, which were captured by different Colonial powers, differently, and
at different times. These different territories were unified together in 1833
under British Colonial Rule.
TNA wanted a merger of North and East provinces
citing ‘the two provinces largely represent Tamil majority’. They wanted a new
constitution. The 1972 Constitution was framed by one of the two major Sinhala
political parties without the consent of the Tamils. So was the 1978
constitution.
Tamil people in this country are hurt and offended that they are
always being treated as second-class citizens. We have been insulted and
humiliated. “We cannot go on like this Sampanthan said.
Tamils were subjected to physical violence whenever they made just
political demands .This happened for several decades. The result was armed
revolt by Tamil Youth for almost three decades .This was a classic instance, in
which the Bullet filled the void created by failure in the process of the
Ballot, said Sampanthan. Sampanthan is justifying LTTE terrorism, said critics.
There was a veiled threat. if Sri Lanka’s leaders failed to negotiate
with all the people to evolve an acceptable political solution, We will not hesitate to do what we
must to get a just solution.
The international community must ensure that the
promises and the commitments given by the Sri Lankan government are adhered to
and implemented. The international community cannot be a spectator anymore with
regard to Sri Lanka, said the TNA.
People in many areas in North and East are staging protests over land,
persons in custody and on the issue of missing persons. “These are matters
that are of concern to our people and we want the international community to
play an important role in finding solutions to these issues”.
The International community must ensure that the promises and the
commitments given by the Sri Lankan Government are adhered to and implemented.
The International community cannot be a spectator anymore with regard to Sri
Lanka. The international community must clearly state their position and ensure
the non-recurrence of the past.
Chief Minister Wigneswaran agreed. “The international community
has a responsibility to protect the Tamil people, he said.” Wigneswaran
had his own take on the Tamil issue. The Tamils of North and East of Sri
Lanka do not consider themselves as minorities, Wigneswaran said. They consider
themselves as the majority. They have been in the North Eastern Province for
more than 2000 years. It is
in the last 100 years that intrusions and incursions have been made
into the terrain of the Tamil speaking by people from elsewhere.
Many Sinhalese forget that the Tamils of the
North and East occupied our Island even before the birth of Buddha. The
Sinhalese have another wrong perception that Sri Lanka is the land of the
Sinhalese. Long before the Sinhalese language was born out of Pali, Tamil
and indigenous dialects, the Tamil Dravidians have been
occupying this land for centuries.
Dayan Jayatilaka wanted to know, how come the
Sinhalese, the much ‘later’ inhabitants, were settled in the best and largest
part of the island while the original ones were not? Why were these so-called
original (Tamil) inhabitants stuck in the least arable, most inhospitable part
of the island instead of strolling down to the rivers and the lush vegetation.
Also, If the Tamils were the inhabitants of the
island before the Buddha was born and the Sinhala language arose, where did
those Tamils come from? And if they came from across the water, then It is that
group who are entitled to the status of original inhabitants and owners,
concluded Dayan.
Bodu
Bala Sena and Sinhala Ravaya wanted legal action taken against Wiggie” and
Sampanthan on their recent statements. A
complaint was lodged with the police, saying they have breached the provisions
of the Constitution.
There is
a highly significant degree of aggression and hostility among the Tamils in
Jaffna. Here are three instances. Television news showed villagers in
Kilinochchi killing a single leopard with mammoties, sticks, and knives. They
kept on attacking long after it was dead. (Derana news 21.6.18) A fight over cinema tickets at a cinema hall in
Vavuniya, extended on to the main road. Television cameras showed youths
hitting each other, with great violence.(Derana news 12.1.19)
Twelve Sri Lanka Navy personnel were injured following
a clash with illegal sand miners in, Kinniya. Four among the injured were
critically injured. Muttur Police arrived at the scene and called for more
police reinforcements from Sampur and China Bay stations to control the
situation. A group of soldiers also came to the scene. Navy personnel fired in
the air to disperse an unruly crowd of about 500 people who had gathered there
to protect the sand miners and protest against the Navy presence.
There was hostility abroad too.
In September 2016, Chief priest of Malaysian Buddhist temple, Sentul, in Malaysia, was assaulted by members of the Malaysian
Tamilan Association and other groups when they heard that Mahinda Rajapaksa was
to visit there. They had abused the
priest with vulgarities and then hit him.
They punched him in the face and also kicked him. The group had gathered
at the temple as they wanted to give a stern warning to all Buddhist temples
not to allow the mass murderer Mahinda Rajapaksa here. They said they would keep
vigil to make sure that Mahinda Rajapaksa did not enter the temple.
There was belligerence of another sort at the
UNHRC meeting of March 2018 in Geneva. The Tamil Separatist Movement was
challenged by a team led by Nalaka Godahewa and Sarath Weerasekera. Unable
to answer, the representative of the
Tamil Separatist Movement got ready to assault them. They were led away. The
Sinhala team observed,” You are leaving the meeting that you yourselves
organized.”(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8Qf_yMu4O8.)
There was defiance too. S. Pathmanapan, a Central
Bank employee, who was summoned by the Presidential Commission of inquiry
probing bond scam, to record a statement, has complained to the Supreme Court
that he was aggressively questioned by some officials of the Attorney General’s
Department, assisting the commission.
He has said that he was taken to
the Chamber of Dappula de Livera, Senior Additional Solicitor General, who
questioned him. Later, he was questioned by senior Deputy Solicitor General,
Milinda Goonetillake. The questioning was aggressive. He was questioned in an
arbitrary, unreasonable manner.
The petitioner requested Supreme
Court to prevent the Attorney General’s Department from taking action against
him. Among the respondents are seven officials of the Attorney General’s
Department, the present Governor of the Central Bank, some members of the
Monetary Board and the members of the commission. The first respondent is de
Livera. (continued)
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference. Serenity Prayer – Reinhold Niebuhr (1892–1971).
The Minister of Foreign Relations Dinesh Gunawardana says that the statements made by the allegedly abducted Swiss Embassy staffer are contradictory.
Therefore, it is reported that the Embassy staffer Gania Banister Francis will be summoned to the CID again to make a fresh statement in the next few days. She has already given statements to the CID on 3 previous occasions.
When the case was taken before the court on December 9, the lawyer appeared for the Embassy staffer Garnia Francis, Upul Kumarapperuma told the court that a local and a foreign doctor attached to the Embassy inspected Garnia Francis and concluded that she was sexually abused by her abductors.
CID also suspects why she did not complain about the incident to the police even three weeks after the so-called abduction. In addition, it is revealed that Garnia Banister Francis received her current name after she was converted to a fundamentalist Christian group.
Meanwhile, it is also revealed that the person who appeared as Garnia Francis’s agent, Manjula Perera is the son of a former UNP Kelaniya Organizer Bevan Perera. At the same time, photographs of Manjula Perera posing for pictures with UNP top leaders are circulating on social media.
Meanwhile, Foreign Relations Minister Dinesh Gunawardana said that the incident could be treated as an attempt to put the government in trouble. Minister Gunawardana was addressing the media in Kandy today
August 17, 2016: Ambassador Keshap, Chief Minister of the Northern Province C.V. Wigneswaran and Minister of National Coexistence, Dialogue and Official Languages Mano Ganesan, on their way to Palaly onboard US Air Force plane C130. Wigneswaran, in his conversation with Keshap, accused the government of poisoning detained LTTE combatants.
Against the backdrop of a deepening crisis, caused by Switzerland providing political asylum to Inspector Nishantha Silva, his wife and three children, followed by accusations over alleged abduction of a local female Embassy employee, the writer examined a spate of high profile propaganda projects, carried out by interested parties, against the country, over the years.
Last week’s Midweek column inquired into as to how Sri Lanka pathetically failed to exploit Lord Naseby’s contradiction of UN war crimes charges, in Oct 2017, Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) bid to deceive the public in 2007, exposure of those propagating lies over Mannar mass graves early this year, a man alleged to have been killed by the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI), in late 2009, surfacing in Tamil Nadu, in May, 2014, Australia providing a new identity to one-time leading JVP activist, Kumar Gunaratnam, in 2013, and a missing LTTE child soldier showing up in an award-winning French movie.
In a way, Switzerland cannot be blamed for seeking to exploit Sri Lanka’s weakness, especially in the wake of wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election as the President just 10 days before. In line with the overall Western strategy, Switzerland accommodated Inspector Nishantha Silva in its asylum programme, caused media furore over an alleged abduction in Colombo, and then questioned the LTTE’s terrorist tag in a high profile case heard there.
The Swiss Federal Court ruled that the LTTE was not a criminal organization. The court acquitted 12 persons of charges filed by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG).
In its indictment, the OAG accused them of violating the Swiss Penal Code by raising funds for the LTTE between 1999 and 2009. Following its nine-year investigation, the OAG accused them of financially supporting the World Tamil Coordinating Committee (WTCC).
But, in June 2018 the Federal Criminal Court found that the hierarchical link between the LTTE and WTCC could not be sufficiently established. The judges also felt there was not enough proof to consider the LTTE a criminal group.
In April, 2019 the OAG appealed against the verdict, insisting that the accused had supported a criminal group.
In a decision, published on Tuesday, Dec 03, the Federal Court upheld the previous ruling, noting that Article 260 in the Swiss Penal Code was designed to combat organized crime of a mafia nature though it has also been applied to terrorist groups, such as al-Qaeda or the Islamic State (IS). The LTTE was not regarded as a criminal organization, at the time the funds were raised, stated the Federal Court.
Over 100 LTTE cadres in
custody poisoned
Sri Lanka never took tangible measures to counter those who propagated lies in a deliberate attempt to ruin the country. They could not stomach the LTTE’s annihilation on the Vanni east front, a decade ago. One-time Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran was one such person. Wigneswaran and a section of the Tamil media, in August 2016 accused the military of killing over 100 LTTE combatants, in custody by poisoning them. The PTI and NDTV were among international media which reported unsubstantiated allegations.
Accusers placed the number of such deaths at 104. Accusations were made while the U.S. Pacific Command’s ‘Pacific Angel’ exercise was underway in the Jaffna peninsula.
Wigneswaran boldly declared that the U.S. Air Forces medical team, in Jaffna would examine the former rehabilitated LTTE cadres, who, he alleged, had fallen sick because they were injected with poisonous substances at government detention or rehabilitation centres.
The then State Defence Minister Ruwan Wijewardene and Health Minister Dr. Rajitha Senaratne dismissed the vicious accusations. Wijewardene offered the international community access to rehabilitation facilities. What the Minister didn’t realize was that by Aug 2018, the vast majority of ex-LTTE combatants had been released.
The US conveniently refrained from making its position clear on Wigneswaran’s claim when the writer raised the issue with the US Embassy in Colombo. There had never been such a claim before TNA’s Wigneswaran sought to humiliate Sri Lanka. It would be pertinent to mention that one-time LTTE subordinate, the TNA, backed common candidate Maithripala Sirisena at the 2015 presidential poll having earlier supported Gen. Sarath Fonseka at the previous poll. On both occasions, the TNA delivered all northern and eastern electoral districts to Fonseka and Sirisena, who contested on the New Democratic Front (NDF) ticket with the ‘Swan’ as its symbol. The TNA did the same for Sajith Premadasa in the North and the East at the last presidential, though the South overwhelmingly defeated the UNPer.
In answer to several questions The Island posed, regarding ex-LTTE cadres being poisoned, US embassy said: “Operation Pacific Angel is providing assistance, based on the specific needs of the local communities. Among the nearly 70 members of this multilateral assistance programme – including some medical staff and engineers from Bangladesh, Nepal, and Maldives, as well as the United States – are over 40 doctors providing basic medical services: dental procedures; physical therapy; general medical assistance; and optometry. These are the only services being provided.”
The writer asked the US Embassy whether it could confirm that US Pacific Command personnel, conducting medical tests on ex-LTTE cadres, allegedly poisoned by the previous government; whether they would be moved to overseas medical facility for further tests; whether the GoSL had been informed of the development; when did the TNA request the US intervention and whether the US military had conducted similar tests in other countries. For obvious reasons, the US side-stepped The Island queries.
The five-day ‘Operation Pacific Angle’ was launched, in Jaffna by the then US Ambassador in Colombo Atul Keshap.
The New Indian Express quoted Wigneswaran as having said that the US Air Force’s medical team would examine ex-LTTE cadres who had been sick because they were injected with poisonous substances by the Sri Lankan armed military while they were undergoing detention or rehabilitation. Wigneswaran, according to the New Indian Express, had told the NPC (Northern Provincial Council) that he had mentioned the plight of the former combatants in his conversation with the US Ambassador, Atul Keshap, and asked if the USAF team could examine them and give an independent report.
Wigneswaran’s allegations died a natural death. The TNA, or the US, never discussed the issue publicly.
SLN blamed for killings carried out by the LTTE
The Sri Lanka Navy was accused of killing a group of Tamil Nadu fishermen, in early 2007, in Indian waters. Accusations placed the then Rajapaksa government in an extremely difficult position. Wartime Navy spokesman Captain D.K.P. Dassanayake (now Commodore) played a significant role in exposing the blatant lie. The writer worked closely with Dassanayake on many stories, during the war and there couldn’t be a better example than the early 2007 accusations as regards fishermen’s deaths to underscore the need to counter propaganda. Dassanayake played a significant role in countering the propaganda, directed at Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda’s Navy. Ironically, Dassanayake, himself, is now embroiled in disappearance of at least 11 Tamils, mostly in 2008. The previous UNP-led government bungled the investigation by politicizing it for obvious reasons. Dassanayake, who served with those who had been deployed off Chalai, in 2009, to intercept LTTE movements and then carried out a clandestine operation, overseas, with a small Navy team, with the backing of the DMI, found himself in real trouble over disappearance cases. Dassanayake’s team commandeered an LTTE owned ship ‘Princess Cristina’, anchored in a foreign harbour, to Colombo harbour, in Dec 2009. The writer was among those who had an opportunity to go on board the vessel immediately after its arrival at the Colombo port where a beaming Dassanayake, and his team, were received by the then Navy Chief VA Thisara Samarasinghe.
Let me discuss how the Navy tackled the missing Tamil Nadu fishermen’s case leading to the disclosure of a big lie, thanks to a chance detection made by the Maldivian Coast Guard. Dassanayake worked tirelessly to bring out the truth. He proved that there was a huge difference between just repeating battlefield reports and actually handling media for strategic purpose. The Island coverage wouldn’t have been a reality without Dassanayake’s role. Interestingly, the Defence Ministry and the Media Centre for National Security (MCNS) never bothered to examine the incident as part of their overall efforts to counter lies. They never did until the end of the war, in May 2009. The Rajapaksa government made some efforts to put the record straight, in the wake of the devastating March 2011 UN report that accused the military of killing over 40,000 in 2009. However, the government failed. The public are owed an explanation as to why millions of USDs were squandered on US and UK PR firms and whether any government personality personally benefited from such projects.
The Indian case is a glaring example of deception meant to undermine the war effort against the LTTE.
In late March 2007 Karunanidhi sought the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s intervention in the wake of an attack on a Tamil Nadu fishing craft, about 35 nautical miles off Kanyakumari, well within Indian territorial waters. In a letter, dated March 31, 2007, addressed to PM Singh, Karunanidhi alleged: “… an unidentified group of attackers opened fire on a Tamil Nadu fishing boat.” He was referring to the killing of five Tamil Nadu fishermen on March 29, 2007. Quoting a fisherman who had survived the attack, the Tamil Nadu leader said that two boats, which approached the ill-fated boat from “the Sri Lankan side and without any provocation or warning, indiscriminately opened fire on the Indian boat. All the attackers, numbering about 20, were youngsters, either bare bodied or in casual dress.”
Karunanidhi made several allegations as well as recommendations to Premier Singh. Karunanidhi warned Singh that unless some stern measures were taken by the government to make Indian waters safe, the situation was likely to get out of control. Alleging that a third party might have carried out the attack, Karunanidhi urged Singh to establish the identity of attackers as well as their international connections. Karunanidhi also called for enhanced Indian Navy and Coast Guard presence in the Tamil Nadu seas and to bring the entire naval effort under a unified command.
The Sri Lankan Navy strongly denied the Tamil Nadu leader’s claims, made in the wake of a section of the Indian media accusing the SLN of the massacre.
When the SLN strongly countered the Indian media reports, Karunanidhi made a ridiculous attempt to assert that some smugglers, with international links might have killed the fishermen. The SLN insisted that there was no basis for claims that there was a third party operating in the sea.
Interestingly, on the day of the Kanyakumari massacre, there had been a high level SLN delegation in New Delhi. The delegation responded to what SLN headquarters called was unfounded allegation. The SLN recalled how the Norwegian – led Scandinavian truce monitoring mission accused an unknown third party of attacking a Chinese fishing vessel about 22 nautical miles north of Mullaitivu on March 19, 2003. The attackers mowed down 16 Chinese and two Sri Lankans on ‘FU Yuan YU 225’. The monitoring mission asserted that neither the LTTE nor the Sri Lankan government could have carried out the attack. Although those who had survived the attack as well as the crew of another Chinese vessel also operating in the area told the mission of the LTTE’s culpability, chief of monitors, retired Major General Tryggve Tellefsen requested the government and the LTTE to find, disarm and arrest ‘criminal elements’ operating on their own.
Both the truce monitoring mission and the Tamil Nadu administration went out of their way to protect the LTTE. Their approach towards terrorism baffled many (Lanka challenges bid to shield Tigers, with strap line Killing of five Tamil Nadu fishermen – The Island, April 5, 2007).
The Indian Coast Guard made a crucial but chance breakthrough on April 11, 2007. Having spotted two ‘vallams’ 26.5 nautical miles southeast of Kanyakumari, a Coast Guard vessel had ordered them to stop. It was among nine ships backed by three maritime aircraft engaged in a special operation in the wake of the Kanyakumari massacre. The Coast Guard swiftly apprehended the ‘vallams’ and took 12 persons into custody.
A section of the Chennai-based media quickly identified the arrested persons as armed Sinhala men. The widely read Dinakaran, affiliated to the ruling DMK, on a front-page report declared that 12 fishermen were in custody. But the arrested consisted of six Sri Lankan Tamils and six Tamil Nadu fishermen. The six Sri Lankans were identified as Arul Gnanadasan (20), C. Robin (23), S. Selvakumar (19), M. Pannibose (28), D. Arul (19) and Ravi Kumar (24). Under interrogation, the Indians claimed that they had no option but to rescue the Sri Lankans stranded off Kanyakumari in a trawler named ‘Maria.’ The Indian Coast Guard seized the two ‘vallams’, about 14 nautical miles away from the ‘Maria’.
India ignored an SLN request for an opportunity to interrogate the arrested Sri Lankans, whom the Navy believed had been involved in the Kanyakumari massacre. The SLN strongly suspected that the six arrested Sri Lankan Tamils were LTTE cadres assigned for a special operation aimed at transferring armaments from the high seas to the Vanni, via Indian waters. The Coast Guard detection and subsequent revelations embarrassed the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister; though he pretended he wasn’t bothered at all (Indian Coast Guard seizes ‘Maria’, six Lankan Tamils-The Island April 16, 2007).
Although India arrested several LTTE cadres, during 2007, beginning with the apprehension of three persons, along with two Indians on February 13, 2007 off Kodiyakarai, the SLN was never given an opportunity to question them (Lanka wants access to ‘terror’ suspects in Tamil Nadu custody-The Island April 19, 2007).
In spite of the DMK’s attempts to whitewash the LTTE, the ‘Q’ branch of the Indian Criminal Investigation Department (CID), on April 27, 2007, accused the LTTE of carrying out the Kanyakumari massacre. The ‘Q’ branch asserted that the six Sri Lankans arrested in the company of Tamil Nadu, men on April 11, 2007, were members of special Sea Tiger squads deployed to ferry arms, ammunition and equipment from an LTTE ship on the high seas. According to a two-page note issued by the then Tamil Nadu Director General of Police, the group in Indian custody was among the units given this task. The arrested persons claimed that members of another Sea Tiger squad carried out the Kanyakumari massacre, whereas the SLN believed the group in custody was responsible. The police chief said that the boat involved in the March 29, 2007, attack also bore the inscription ‘Maria.’
The ‘Q’ branch made another extremely important revelation into clandestine LTTE operations. The investigation resulted in one of the most important findings made during 2007, thanks to a chance detection made by the tiny Maldivian Coast Guard, a couple of weeks later. Under interrogation, those Sea Tiger cadres, arrested on April 11, 2007, revealed that another squad had seized a large Indian fishing vessel, ‘Sri Krishna’, on March 4, 2007 close to the Indo – Lanka maritime boundary. The seized vessel’s crew comprised 12 men-10 from Kanyakumari and one each from Thoothukudi and Kerala. The arrested persons claimed that the Sea Tigers commandeered the vessel after having transferred the crew in an LTTE craft to the Vanni. The ‘Q’ branch made the revelation in the backdrop of some interested parties alleging that the SLN either seized or destroyed ‘Sri Krishna’ (LTTE massacred Indian fishermen, seized large vessel with 12 men with strap line Tamil Nadu probe reveals-The Island April 29, 2007).
LTTE Political Wing leader S.P. Thamilselvan accused the SLN of seizing Sri Krishna.
A humiliated Karunanidhi informed the State Assembly of the LTTE’s direct involvement in a spate of incidents. The DMK leader had no option but to acknowledge the LTTE’s complicity in attacks on Tamil Nadu fishermen. However, the opposition AIADMK didn’t make a big issue about it. Then much to the surprise of all, the Centre intervened on behalf the LTTE. No less a person than the then Defence Minister, A.K. Anthony, reiterated the hotly disputed charge that the SLN was continuing attacks on Tamil Nadu fishermen in the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar. Anthony was responding on May 9, 2007 to a query raised by C. Perumal in the Rajya Sabha.
Perumal was evidently acting at the behest of the LTTE lobby. Reporting a slight increase in such attacks, Minister Anthony accused the SLN of killing 77 Tamil Nadu fishermen between 1991 and 2007 period. India totally overlooked a spate of incidents as well as the findings made by the ‘Q’ branch.
Sri Lanka strongly denied Indian claims alleging complicity on the part of some Indian officials in the LTTE terror campaign (India shields Tigers despite compelling evidence of attacks on TN fishermen with strap line…overlooks Kanyakumari massacre, seizure of Sri Krishna with 12 men, castigates SLN in Rajya Sabha-The Island May 11, 2007).
What Tamil Nadu, as well as India, never expected was the Maldives intervening in the clandestine LTTE arms smuggling operation. That intervention was made by the Maldivian Coast Guard on May 16, 2007. The Maldivian Coast Guard engaged a vessel carrying the Sri Lankan flag after the latter fired at a Maldivian fishing craft. Following a 12-hour standoff, the Maldivians sank the craft flying the Sri Lankan flag. There had been some Indian naval personnel on-board the Maldivian craft at the time of the confrontation. The Indian presence ensured that their government knew what exactly happened in the Maldivian waters. The Maldivians rescued five persons who jumped overboard from the sinking vessel, subsequently identified as ‘Sri Krishna’. The rescued men told the Maldivians and their Indian instructors (The Indians were helping the Maldivian Coast Guard personnel to familiarize with CG vessel Huravee, gifted by New Delhi to Male) the circumstances under which they were found in Maldivian waters, while engaged in transferring armaments from a floating warehouse. Sri Krishna’s skipper, Simon Soza had been among the five rescued by the Maldivians. The Sea Tigers admitted that the remaining Indians (other members of ‘Sri Krsihna’ crew) were being held in a camp in the Vanni (Maldives sink Indian craft hijacked by Sea Tigers-The Island May 18, 2007).
The sinking of the ‘Sri Krishna’ was the second high profile incident involving an Indian trained terrorist group in Maldivian territory. The raid on Male during the first week of November, 1988 by sea borne PLOTE (People’s Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) terrorists at the behest of a Colombo-based Maldivian businessman, Abdulla Luthufee was the first. Interestingly, the Indian Navy sank MV Progress Light commandeered by Luthufee’s mercenaries in a bid to reach Sri Lankan waters. The writer had the opportunity to interview Luthufee, both at his residence and the home of the writer.
Had the SLN had an effective deployment in the seas off the northwestern coast, it could have thwarted an LTTE plan to shift the remaining crew of ‘Sri Krishna’ from the Vanni mainland to Tamil Nadu. The LTTE transferred altogether 11 Indians on May 18 and dropped them at two different locations. Had Soza died during the confrontations, the LTTE would have quietly killed the Indians to cover-up the Sri Krishna episode. The Maldives promptly responded to an SLN request to question those in their custody. Their interrogation helped SLN efforts to break the enemy sea supply route (LTTE frees Indians after losing ‘Sri Krishna’ with strap line SLN gains access to Sea Tigers in Maldivian custody-The Island, May 20, 2007).
Soon after the Maldivians had intercepted the ‘Sri Krishna’, the Norwegian embassy in Colombo sought information from the Maldivian High Commission in Colombo regarding the incident. The Norwegians probably got in touch with the Maldivians at the behest of the LTTE. However, by the time Norway got in touch with the diplomatic mission, the Maldivians had cleared SLN intelligence to interrogate those in their custody (Foreign embassy tried to help LTTE arms vessel escape with strap line Sinking of ‘Sri Krishna’ by the Maldivian Coast Guard-The Island May 26, 2007).
Sri Lanka needs to examine the wider picture when probing the conduct of the Switzerland Embassy in Colombo.
By Tamara Kunanayakam, former Ambassador/ Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the U.N. at Geneva
December 11, 2019, 6:06 pm
“Ifyou know the enemy and know yourself,you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” Sun Tzu, The Art War, 5th Century BC
The recent dramatic events involving the Swiss Embassy came as a surprise to most Sri Lankans. Just as the large majority was looking ahead to a new era with a President they had just elected, a non politician with a simple lifestyle, yet determined, who they believed would be capable of returning to their lives, a sense of security, peace, economic development, the shot came from a quarter they least expected. From a small country in the Alps known for its neutrality, chocolate, cheese and snow capped mountains.
The context
To understand events and their significance, all things must be placed in their context. On 16 November, CID Inspector Nishantha Silva decamped without official permission to Switzerland and obtained asylum in that country. Only a week before, the Yahapalana regime, installed and virtually administered by the US in particular, was badly defeated. The new President Gotabaya Rajapaksa received a clear mandate never to allow anyone to infringe upon the nation’s sovereignty or betray the country’s independence at the behest of any foreign power, to strengthen the domestic economy, and reject the infamous US-led Human Rights Council resolution 30/1 co-sponsored by the Yahapalana government.
The months preceding his election had seen widespread opposition and public anger against secret defense agreements negotiated or signed with the United States – MCC, ACSA and SOFA – that implied a surrender of sovereignty and military occupation of the entire island, the loss of land and strategic resources, privatisation of public services and institutions, a mass displacement of population, the entanglement of Sri Lanka in wars with friendly nations in the region, and the threat to peace and security.
‘Exfiltration’ of Chief Inspector Nishantha de Silva
Inspector Nishantha Silva is not a ‘Mr Nobody’. He was Head of the CID’s Organized Crimes Investigation Division tasked by the previous pro-Western Yahapalana regime to produce evidence, real or fabricated, against targeted political opponents and the armed forces for use in high profile criminal cases of particular interest to the West. Significantly, Silva was charged with investigations within the framework of the infamous US-led Human Rights Council resolution 30/1, with external actors directly involved, the purpose being to prepare case files for use in war crimes proceedings controlled by the US and its allies. His was the work begun by the Darusman Panel and continued by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). The entire exercise was part of the US efforts to militarily occupy the island nation, strategically located in the Indian Ocean, to advance its hegemonic agenda for a “Free and Open Indo Pacific” (FOIP), a sinister security system bringing together two distinct regions and Oceans in a “a networked security architecture” under US leadership “to fight and win” a war against China.
IP Silva was obviously decamping to escape justice in Sri Lanka hounded by allegations (and exposure) of fabricating evidence, false arrests, and forcing people to turn state witness to implicate Gotabaya Rajapaksa in particular. In a high profile case in which officers of the Sri Lankan Navy were accused of involvement in the disappearance of 11 persons, a case highlighted in the 2019 OHCHR report, the key prosecution witness made a special statement to the Colombo Fort Magistrate implicating IP Silva and another key witness for fabricating evidence.
The expeditious manner in which the Swiss authorities facilitated his surreptitious evacuation together with his entire family and the important means placed at his disposal – overnight visas issued on a weekend and asylum in Switzerland – smells of an exfiltration operation triggered by the massive electoral defeat of a pro-Western regime and the West’s need to protect “an asset in place,” a vital source of intelligence. The operation permitted Switzerland and Western allies, which have systematically been part of initiatives against Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council, to gain control over highly sensitive, confidential and strategic information, including statements, records, personal files and finger prints of 1,500 intelligence officers.
The exfiltration must have been planned and organised in advance. Silva was not off on a skiing holiday in the Alps, he would not be returning to face disciplinary action for leaving the country without prior approval, a police inquiry on the manner he conducted investigations, court proceedings, possible imprisonment, and now, theft of highly sensitive and strategic information and its likely transfer to foreign governments for hostile intent.
‘War crimes’ proceedings in national courts?
It is likely the files thus exfiltrated are for use against Sri Lanka at the March sessions of the Human Rights Council. They may also be used, along with similarly questionable ‘evidence’ gathered by the Darusman Panel and OHCHR, in “war crimes” proceedings in national courts of one or more Western countries under the controversial universal jurisdiction doctrine whereby courts in one country may judge certain crimes committed outside its territory, regardless of the nationality or country of residence of the accused or the victim. Such use of national courts is on the rise with ad hoc international criminal tribunals and hybrid courts in discredit. National courts may be the West’s next best option for Sri Lanka, in view of its failure to impose hybrid courts on the country.
Switzerland is among the some 15 countries (including the US, UK, Canada, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Australia, and Israel) that have conducted investigations, initiated prosecutions and held trials based on universal jurisdiction or arrested and extradited persons to a third country for prosecution.
Intelligence-for-Evacuation swap
It may be assumed that the extraordinary speed in which the Swiss authorities evacuated IP Silva was in exchange for intelligence in his possession. Espionage may be defined as “the process of stealing information for a hostile intent from opponents, concerning strategic and national security issues, and other information considered confidential and of vital importance for a state”. It necessarily implies organisation, institutionalisation and leadership by an opponent government to achieve among other things, military or political objectives.
The Swiss intervention constitutes a violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and the principle of non intervention laid down in the UN Charter, essential conditions for ensuring and developing friendly relations. The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which sets the rules for facilitating the development of friendly relations, and the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, stipulate that reporting by diplomatic missions must be in conformity with international law, which prohibits interference in the national affairs of the receiving state and requires that the rule concerning exhaustion of remedies in local courts is in no way affected.
The result has been a significant deterioration in the relations between the countries, incompatible with purposes of the United Nations, in particular that relating to developing “friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”.
Swiss allegations of abduction of local embassy employee – a tall story grown taller
Swiss accusations of ‘abduction/detention’ of a local embassy employee, a Sri Lankan citizen, followed hot on the heels of their exfiltration of CI Silva only the day before.
What we have is a convoluted version from the Swiss authorities without facts or evidence, a tall story that has grown ever taller and more complicated in the telling resulting in generalised disbelief in the incident actually occurring. How credible is it, for instance, that the mobile phone of a local employee contained highly confidential information of strategic importance to Switzerland, more important than that stolen by IP Silva?
It is apparent that the Swiss authorities were in contact with the alleged victim throughout, with the Ambassador speaking to the authorities on her behalf. In all likelihood, she was kept on Embassy premises with no justification provided for holding a Sri Lankan citizen, a local employee not entitled to diplomatic immunity, incommunicado for two weeks.
Having demanded an investigation into the incident and claimed that the alleged victim’s health had so deteriorated warranting airlifting to Switzerland by air ambulance, the Embassy refused to accede to Sri Lanka’s requests to allow the alleged victim to make a complaint so that investigations may be conducted, denying access to a Sri Lankan citizen, even withholding her name. By its failure to cooperate with the host state, the Swiss authorities have obstructed the course of justice and Sri Lanka’s ability to fulfill its obligations. The re-appearance of the local employee on Monday, 9 Dec. cannot be attributed to any cooperation by the Swiss Embassy, but to a Court order preventing her from leaving the country until that date and requiring that she give a statement before then.
By refusing to cooperate with the authorities of the host State, the Swiss Embassy acted in a manner incompatible with the UN Charter-based duty to cooperate. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations stipulates that In carrying out the functions of the mission, diplomats from sending states are duty bound to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state, the duty not to interfere in internal affairs, the duty not to misuse diplomatic premises for wrongful purpose, i.e, for purposes that are incompatible with the functions of the mission, and the duty not to affect in any way the rule concerning the exhaustion of remedies in the local courts, when applicable.
The only tangible facts available are those relating to the CID Inspector Nishantha Silva. The context and timing of the accusation of alleged ‘abduction / detention’ may serve multiple purposes, which, in the writer’s view, include :
(a) to discredit the newly elected President Gotabaya Rajapaksa against whom the Western media had already orchestrated a massive campaign based on prejudice and lies ;
(b) to add the case of alleged abduction to the documentation being gathered by OHCHR for use in a war crimes tribunal as evidence of intimidation by the new President and his Government. The OHCHR website has published the statements by the Swiss authorities, but none issued by Sri Lanka. The only other news item in this respect is a news report by the website Sri Lanka Brief, which links the alleged ‘abduction’ to IP Nishantha de Silva;
(c) as ‘fake target’ to coverup the ‘Silva exfiltration affair’ and turn the tables on Sri Lanka so that the ‘accused’ becomes Sri Lanka, not Switzerland;
(d) as a lure to send the new Government off on a wild goose chase allowing the West the time and space to prepare the offensive in Geneva, in March 2020; and,
(e) to keep the public entertained as the all but forgotten agreements with the US – MCC, SOFA, and ACSA – resurface from their temporary retreat.
Swiss– Sri Lanka relations, how friendly?
Contrary to widespread belief, Switzerland is not a neutral country, consistently siding with the US and the European Union in conflicts between the West and Global South.
In the United Nations, It forms part of the Western regional group and associates itself routinely with the US and European Union in sponsoring politically motivated resolutions, including against Sri Lanka. It was among the 17 mostly Western countries, including the US, that requested holding of the 2009 Special Session on Sri Lanka, which was announced on 19 May 2009, the final day of the war against the terrorist LTTE organisation. Other landmark resolutions it has co-sponsored that have gradually increased external interference in Sri Lanka, include the April 2013 resolution that for the first time requested an external entity, OHCHR, to submit a “comprehensive report” on Sri Lanka; the March 2014 resolution that authorised international monitoring and international investigations, also in the form of OHCHR, which extended their scope beyond human rights to “related crimes”; and the March 2015 resolution 30/1 that called for a hybrid court and comprehensive reform of the State, its laws and institutions.
Switzerland does not consider LTTE a criminal organisation, its members are permitted to freely conduct political and fundraising activities. Their involvement in money laundering is public knowledge, as is their practice of intimidation, extortion, blackmail, and physical violence against other Tamils. According to the Swiss Attorney General’s Office, nearly 60 million Swiss Francs were remitted to Sri Lanka between 1999 and May 2009. Recently, on 3 December, the Federal Supreme Court acquitted 12 persons accused of either belonging to a criminal organization, the LTTE, or of providing funds. The Court ruled that the Swiss Penal Code was not designed for organizations that committed terrorist acts in which the terror was not an end in itself, but pursued predominantly different goals. Recognising that LTTE had committed terrorist attacks, it held that its primary goal was rather to lead a conventional armed struggle, the quasi-state administration of territory and recognition of the independence of its ethnic community.
Swiss mainstream media, which has a broad European readership in German, French and Italian-speaking countries, has also consistently supported the LTTE’s separatist agenda. The candidacy of Gotabaya Rajapaksa for Presidency and his subsequent election saw an escalation of falsification ad infinitum of the conditions prevailing during the last phase of the war and accusations of war crimes.
Friendly relations and sovereign equality
A principal purpose of the United Nations is “to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples”. The Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States, further defines the principles upon which international relations must be based. The rules for diplomatic relations that would contribute to the development of friendly relations among nations are laid down in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
In both the exfiltration affair and the alleged “abduction/detention affair, the actions of the Swiss authorities and its diplomatic mission in Colombo constitute infringements of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and the related non intervention principle, which is an essential condition for ensuring and developing friendly relations between nations.
Damage, self-inflicted
In the opinion of this writer, the Foreign Ministry has yet to respond to the attacks on sovereignty, in spite of international law being on its side. For the present at least, Switzerland seems to have won the day, having successfully maneuvered Sri Lanka’s attention away from its own extremely unfriendly act, which will have grave consequences for the country’s future stability, security and development.
By singularly focusing on the alleged ‘abduction/detention’ affair, the Foreign Ministry has let itself be diverted from the CI Silva’s exfiltration, the gravity of which is incomparable with the alleged abduction of a minor employee to obtain information stored on her mobile phone. Espionage is an act that affects the fundamental interests of the State. And yet, according to sources referred to in a recent article in The Island by Shamindra Ferdinando, “Sri Lanka hadn’t so far raised the issue of the police officer being given refuge in Switzerland”. Sources had also suggested that raising it had been “pre-empted” by the Swiss accusation of abduction of a local employee (The Island, 28.11.2019)
Why was this conscious decision taken not to pursue the damaging case of possible espionage and exfiltration? Why did the Foreign Ministry fail to protest Swiss intervention in the country’s internal affairs and its refusal to cooperate? These deeply unfriendly acts are clearly incompatible with the principle of sovereignty and the related principles of sovereign equality of states and non-intervention, which are non-derogable peremptory norms of general international law that form the basis of the United Nations Charter, as they do the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (1963).
The damage has also been done. OHCHR has already published on its website the Swiss version of the “abduction/detention” allegation, with the obvious intention of adding the ‘case’ to its “war crimes” documentation for use in future proceedings outside Sri Lanka. Statements by Sri Lankan authorities are not reflected on the website. Western media with its global antennas have gone to town on the alleged “abduction/detention” they attribute to the “return of the Rajapaksa brothers,” taking care not to leave out a reference to so-called “war crimes”. It is seldom that a foreign media carries a correction, or, if it does, it will be so that nobody notices or cares!
Now, for all intents and purposes, Sri Lanka finds itself cornered and trapped on terrain chosen by the opponent, literally on Swiss territory, on the defensive, fighting windmills and running in circles even as the battle front is being readied elsewhere and the US self-defense ‘agreements,’ MCC, SOFA, and ACSA, lurk in the shadows.
Turning the tables on Sri Lanka
Had there been an understanding of the opponent, events could have been anticipated and speedy and effective action taken on the CI Silva exfiltration affair, in which Switzerland stood on weaker ground, possibly preempting the alleged “abduction” or limiting the damage caused. The failure to do so allowed the Swiss authorities to turn the tables on Sri Lanka, thus becoming the accused instead of the accuser. The upshot was a defensive statement made on 28 Nov. by the Foreign Ministry reaffirming “unequivocally its commitment to give effect to the obligations undertaken as a State Party to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), to facilitate the smooth functioning of diplomatic missions in Sri Lanka”.
It is anybody’s guess why the Foreign Ministry thought it necessary to make such a statement when Sri Lanka had not failed in fulfilling any of its obligations as a receiving State, which, under the Vienna Convention, include not violating mission premises, protecting diplomats and their families from any form of arrest or detention, protecting all forms of diplomatic communication, exempting from taxation, and providing immunity from civil and administrative jurisdiction.
There is no indication either that Sri Lanka had failed to facilitate the “smooth functioning” of the Swiss mission, whose functions are to : (a) represent Switzerland; (b) protect its interests and its nationals “within the limits permitted by international law”; (c) negotiate with the Government of Sri Lanka; (d) ascertain “by all lawful means” conditions and developments in Sri Lanka, and report thereon to its Government; and (e) promote friendly relations between the two states and develop their economic, cultural and scientific relations.
If Sri Lanka had not failed in its obligations vis-a-vis the Swiss Embassy or in the duty to facilitate its smooth functioning, why then did Sri Lanka’s Foreign Ministry consider it necessary to reassure the Swiss authorities of its “unequivocal ” commitment?
Sri Lanka has the right to demand respect. As such, it’s foreign policy must be based on respect for international law and multilateralism, ensuring that its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity are fully respected at all times and the principles of sovereign equality, non intervention and non interference fully complied with.
It is the duty of all States to develop friendly relations with others, irrespective of their political, economic and social systems or the levels of their development, in a manner that conforms with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Beware of MCC, SOFA, and ACSA!
It is to be hoped that Sri Lanka will not adopt an ‘Ostrich Foreign Policy’ hoping that its troubles will go away! ‘War crimes tribunals’ are a real threat, but they are only the means to achieving the strategic ends of the country imposing it, necessarily a Western country. In the case of Sri Lanka, it is no secret that it is the US that has been leading the Human Rights Council resolutions, directly or indirectly through its Western allies. The end it seeks is also known. It is an end that will embroil Sri Lanka in America’s “lethal” wars for “self-preservation,” fighting friendly nations in its own neighbourhood, causing death and destruction.
The government would soon decide on a future course of action in respect of controversial Inspector Nishantha Silva taking refuge in Switzerland.
Authoritative sources told The Island that the alleged abduction of a local employee of the Swiss Embassy in Colombo close on the heels of Silva, his wife and three children leaving the country on Nov 24 had distracted the government.
Silva was attached to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and entrusted with handling several high profile cases, including a spate of abductions, blamed on the Navy.
Sources said that Sri Lanka was now in a position to raise the police officer’s matter following investigations into the abduction of Senior Migration Officer (SMO) Garnier Banister Francis (formerly named Sriyalatha Perera).
The final decision could be delayed due to the complexity of the case, a senior government official said.
Well informed sources said that disciplinary action could be initiated against Inspector Silva as he had left the country in violation of the Establishment Code.
The Swiss Embassy, in a brief statement, issued on November 29, 2019, denied having received a request from the Sri Lankan government for the extradition of IP Silva attached to the CID.
The CID has questioned the embassy employee for nearly 20 hours since last Sunday, (08).
Swiss Ambassador Hanspeter Mock was rushed to Bern for urgent consultations. Foreign Ministry consulted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who was in New Delhi regarding the Swiss move to deploy an air ambulance for the embassy employee’s transfer. The government took up strong position that the accuser couldn’t be allowed to leave the country without following immigration formalities.
The case will be taken up today (Dec 12) before the Fort Chief Magistrate Lanka Jayaratne.
Well informed sources said that the embassy employee had made statements that contradicted Swiss Ambassador Mock’s complaint as well as the subsequent written complaint to the police on Nov 27 and Nov 29, respectively.
Minister Mahinda Amaraweera told The Island yesterday that the incident involving local employee of Swiss had been discussed at the Cabinet meeting chaired by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa on Tuesday, at the Presidential Secretariat. The minister said they were of the view that interested parties had staged what he called abduction drama to cover up Nishantha Silva’s episode and also embarrass the new government.
By Prof. Gamini Keerawella, Ph.D. Executive Director Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo- Courtesy Island
The rapid economic growth witnessed by China and India and the acquisition of near blue-water naval capabilities along with other power projection competence by these powers has ushered a new politico-strategic environment in the Indian Ocean.
Consequent to the economic and politico-strategic resurgence of Asia along with other changes in international politics, the center of gravity in global politics in the new millennium is gradually moving towards Asia. It is now estimated that Asia will surpass North America and Europe combined in global power based on GDP, population size, military spending and technological investment by 2030. According to the World Bank, South Asia solidified its lead as the fastest growing region in the world in 2016. WTO rated China the second largest merchandise trader in the world in 2016. Accordingly, China has risen to the second largest economy in the world, surpassing Japan in the new century. Today, China lays claim to the second largest navy in the world.
The shifting of the center of gravity in global politics from the West to Asia has made the Indian Ocean a pivotal global geo-strategic space in global politics. The uninterrupted flow of hydrocarbon energy resource from the Persian Gulf is vital for the continued breathing of the global economy. The Indian Ocean has become the principal conveyor belt for the international coal trade where China and India are now the top two importers and South Africa, Indonesia, and Australia together account for more than half the world’s exports of thermal coal. The Indian Ocean ports handle about 30 percent of global trade. Nearly 40 percent of the world’s offshore petroleum is produced in the Indian Ocean and two-thirds of global seaborne oil trade transits the Indian Ocean, rounding South Asia. As a result, South Asia’s position in the global order has also changed. South Asian advances in the knowledge industry linked with the IT revolution are also very impressive today. The impact of the lead in ‘colonizing the cyberspace’ by South Asia is reverberated in the Silicon Valley too. South Asian brainpower is a critical factor in the Western corporate world.
The geo-strategic importance of South Asia is further enhanced by the ascendancy of India. With a population of over a billion and an impressive growth rate above the world average, India has become an aspiring global power. India is the third largest oil importer, after USA and China. In the last two decades, India has taken impressive strides in the area of knowledge industry and R&D. India is ranked fourth in the Global Fire Power (GFP) ranking, based on each nation’s potential for conventional war-making capabilities across land, sea and air1. Today, India’s military is the third largest and its air force the fourth largest with 1,080 combat aircrafts. The Indian Ocean is critically important to the economic and politico-strategic interests and calculations of the two emerging Asian giants: India and China.
The changing strategic contours in the post-Cold War Indian Ocean were mirrored in the new foreign policy approaches and perspectives of India. In this regard two developments are to be noted. The first is the ‘Look East’ policy. The Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao first announced it in 1991 and the subsequent governments of Atal Bihari Vajpayee (1998-2004) and Manmohan Singh (2004-2014) made it a key foreign policy direction. The focus of the Look East policy was to strengthen economic and strategic relations with the South East Asian Countries. In 1992, India became a ‘Sectoral Dialogue Partner’ of ASEAN. After protracted negotiations, the ASEAN–India Free Trade Area (AIFTA) came into effect in 2010. At the same time, India endeavored to develop its cooperation with Asian regional groupings, such as the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). In order to promote Look East policy further, Prime Minister Narendra Modi changed it to ‘Act East’ policy. The ‘Look East Act East’ policy is a clear manifestation of India’s changed foreign policy priorities.
The second is the new strategic partnership with the United States. The close strategic relationship with the Soviet Union was a key pillar of the Indian foreign policy since 1971. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, however, India changed its strategic gear that paved the way for growing strategic convergence between India and the United States. Heralding a new era in U.S.-India relations, the ‘Agreed Minutes on Defence Relations Between the United States and India’ was signed in 1995. Since then, the U.S.-India strategic partnership has strengthened significantly. In 2015, ‘Agreed Minutes on Defence Relations’ was renewed and upgraded as ‘Framework for the U.S.-India Defence Relationship’ to achieve greater interaction and cooperation between the armed forces. A further step in that direction was taken in 2018 by signing the COMCASA (Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement) to facilitate interoperability between the two militaries and sale of high-end technology. It paved the way for the establishment of the U.S.-India 2+2 Ministerial dialogue in September 2018. Accordingly, the security relationship with the United States gained real substance under Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
In the changing geo-politics and geo-strategic conditions in Asia and in the Indian Ocean, the United States also placed unprecedented weight on Asia in its foreign policy in the new millennium. It is reflected in ‘Pivot Asia’ strategy, which President Barack Obama first outlined in his address to the Australian Parliament on 17 November 2011. In the light of growing prosperity in Asia, the ‘Pivot Asia’ strategy aimed to (i), strengthen US bilateral security alliances in Asia, (ii), intensify working relationships with regional states and the US, and (iii) boost regional trade and investment.
The change of terminology from the ‘Indian Ocean’ to the ‘Indo-Pacific Region’ underlies evolving defence and strategic praxis on the part of some key actors of the region.
Walter C Lodwig III employed the term ‘Neo-Nixon Doctrine’ to analyze this foreign policy demarche which was aimed at calibrating U.S. interests and regional commitment by counting on major democratic powers in the Indian Ocean in the context of the relative decline of US power in the emerging multi-polar world1. In 2011, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton remarked,
“The Asia-Pacific has become a key driver of global politics. Stretching from the Indian subcontinent to the western shores of the Americas, the region spans two oceans — the Pacific and the Indian — that are increasingly linked by shipping and strategy.… Harnessing Asia’s growth and dynamism is central to American economic and strategic interests and a key priority for President Obama. Open markets in Asia provide the United States with unprecedented opportunities for investment, trade, and access to cutting-edge technology. Our economic recovery at home will depend on exports and the ability of American firms to tap into the vast and growing consumer base of Asia.”1
The term ‘Indo-Pacific Region’ gained rapid strategic currency first in US strategic thinking and subsequently, in strategic discourse in Japan, Australia and India this context.
From the Indian Ocean to the Indo-Pacific Region
The change of terminology from the ‘Indian Ocean’ to the ‘Indo-Pacific Region’ underlies evolving defence and strategic praxis on the part of some key actors of the region. Traditionally, the Pacific and Indian Oceans were seen as largely separate strategic spheres. For the Indo-Pacific construct, the Indian and the Pacific Oceans constitute a single and interdependent strategic and economic space. Before ‘Indo-Pacific’ entered the geo-political and geostrategic discourse, the term ‘Asia Pacific’ has been used since the late 1980s to identify a zone of emerging markets that have been experiencing rapid economic growth. Though the two terms sound similar, they are somewhat different. The term Asia Pacific gained currency especially after the establishment of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) in 1989. As India is not considered a part of the region of Asia-Pacific, India is not included in APEC. The ‘Asia-Pacific’ is more of an economic conception, rather than a security related notion.
In contrast, the Indo-Pacific combines broadly the Indian and the Pacific Oceans and the landmass that surround them into a single integrated theatre. As it is still an evolving concept, its exact parameters are not yet precisely defined1. It encompasses both economic as well as geo-political and geo-strategic domains. The Indo-Pacific is primarily a maritime space and its focus was mainly on maritime security and cooperation. The new urge for maritime security and cooperation in Indo-Pacific relates to evolving geo-politics and geo-strategies. In short, the construct of Indo-Pacific manifests the shift in global power and influence from the West to the East.
The United States, India, Australia, and Japan are in the forefront in promoting the concept of Indo-Pacific region. The initiative of ‘strategic rebalancing’ to the Asia-Pacific by the Obama administration reflected the shift. Its declared objective was to promote rules-based political, economic and security regimes for Asia. The United States joined the regional East Asia Summit (EAS) grouping, concluded agreements with Australia and the Philippines to allow U.S. troop rotations, and pledged to shift U.S. naval posture to give greater weight to the Asia-Pacific. In 2016, the Obama administration initiated the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which the Trump administration abandoned later. Instead, President Donald Trump called for a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP) at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Vietnam in November 2017. Though the free and open Indo-Pacific concept echoes many elements of previous administrations’ policies, it still remains amorphous. Nevertheless, the term Indo-Pacific becomes the buzzword in US policy in Asia. According to the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report, published by the US Department of Defence in June 2019,
“The Indo-Pacific is the single most consequential region for America’s future. Spanning a vast stretch of the globe from the West coast of the United States to the Western shores of India. The region is home to the world’s most populous state, most populous democracy, and largest Muslim majority state, and includes over half of earth’s population. Among the ten largest standing armies in the world, 7 resides in the Indo-Pacific; and 6 countries in the region possess nuclear weapons”1.
The Report further stated, “The United States is a Pacific nation. Our ties to the Indo-Pacific are forged by history, and our future is inextricably linked…. The past, present, and future of the United States are interwoven with the Indo-pacific”1. Australia has been pushing the Indo-Pacific concept since the Australian Prime Minister aired it in New Delhi in 2008. The concept of Indo-Pacific is the frame of both the 2016 Defence White Paper and the 2017 Foreign Policy White Paper of Australia. In August 2016, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced the ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy’ at the Tokyo International Conference on African Development held in Kenya. It has now become the official policy of Japan. In June 2019, Japan outlined three pillars of Japan’s effort to realize free and open Indo-Pacific: promotion and establishment of the Rule of Law, freedom of trade, freedom of navigation etc.; pursuit of economic prosperity; and commitment for peace and stability1. During its annual Summit, ASEAN released a joint statement in June 2019 called ‘Asian Outlook on Indo-Pacific’, defining Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean regions as a single interconnected region. As Nazia Hussain observed, “the Asian Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP) is an initial step towards formally incorporating ASEAN Centrality in the evolving Indo-Pacific concept. The AOIP has been much anticipated as different powers assert their conceptions of the Indo-Pacific region in which ASEAN claims a key role”1.
Why does the US pursue vigorously the concept of Indo-Pacific? It is an attempt to calibrate its geo-economic, geo-political and geo-strategic interests in the changing global context. First of all, America wanted to be an integral part of ‘the arc of prosperity’. When the Indian and the Pacific Oceans are integrated into a single strategic theatre, the United States will become an in-side power. Before that, the United States is considered an extra-regional power in the Indian Ocean. To cite an example, in the Indian Ocean Peace Zone deliberations at the UN IOPZ Ad Hoc Committee in the 1970s, the US was considered an extra-regional state. In Indo-Pacific, the United States is inside the region that would bestow an added rationale for it to maintain bases in the Indian Ocean region. More importantly, US view the concept as a geo-strategic advice that can be used to checkmate and balance China by mobilizing ‘democracies’- India, Australia and Japan- in a critical geo-political theatre.
India also found promise in the new construct of Indo-Pacific to further its economic and strategic interests. Hence, the Indian political leaders and the strategic community have been pushing the construct of Indo-Pacific assiduously since 2010. The Indo-pacific concept offers an ideological rationale for India’s ‘Look East Act East’ policy. The concept Indo-Pacific region offers India with a wider area of strategic maneuverability beyond the Indian Ocean as an emerging global power. The Indian policy makers and strategic community are happy with the term Indo-Pacific as it inadequately serves India’s changing geo-strategic interests. They view “Indo-Pacific” construct as a space for closer partnership with the East Asian market economies. While maintaining trade links with China, India seeks to develop a credible strategic deterrence against China through strategic partnership with democracies in the Indo-pacific. The emerging strategic alliances between India, US, Australia and Japan in the Indo-Pacific enhance India’s political and strategic standing, regionally and globally.
In order to examine the political and strategic implications of India’s strategic flying eastward for South Asia in the emerging geo-political framework of Indo-Pacific Region, first of all, it is necessary to define South Asia. What is really meant by ‘South Asia’? The term South Asia bags different notions, depending on the context of its use and the underlying stake of its construction. The term has been presented as a civilizational entity, a geographical description and also as a political idea. The geo-political construct of South Asia is basically a political idea. Geo-politically what is South Asia? Is it the region as a unit or the countries in the region or both? It should be noted that South Asia is one of the least integrated regions in the world. The intra-regional trade in South Asia accounts for only 5% of its total trade, manifesting a low degree of regional economic bonding1. As a geopolitical construct, South Asia is something more than India. But, the conspicuous feature of South Asia is the central and asymmetrical presence of India in South Asia. India’s centrality in South Asia is geo-political. None of the South Asian countries interact with another without touching or crossing Indian land, sea or air space. India’s preponderance over all others in South Asia based on its size, power, resources and development is also an undeniable reality.
With the identification of India in Indo-Pacific space along with new strategic partnerships, its position in the global constellation of power has gone up. India’s place in the global diplomatic high table is well secured. It is pertinent to quote what Rex Tillerson said at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC in October 2017 about India after assuming the post of US Secretary of State:
“The United States and India are increasingly global partners, with growing strategic convergence. Indians and Americans don’t just share an affinity for democracy: we share a vision of the future. ….In this period of uncertainty and somewhat angst, India needs a reliable partner on the world stage. I want to make clear, with our shared values and vision for global stability, peace and prosperity, the United States is that that partner”1.
Raising of the international standing of India does not mean that South Asia’s position is also equally enhanced. South Asia has been one of the most conflict-ridden regions in the world. India and Pakistan was born in an environment of conflict and continue to remain so even after 70 years, getting locked into multiple levels of conflict and rival foreign policy approaches. The relationship between India and its other neighbors constantly fluctuates in an environment of mutual fear and suspicion. One of the key questions that arises in the context is whether India can move forward in the Indo-Pacific framework by leaving out the South Asian geo-strategic baggage. It will take some time for India to bring hegemonic stability to the South Asian region with its enhanced power posture. Barry Buzan captures this situation lucidly:
“There is no change in the general pattern of amity and enmity. The two biggest powers in the region, India and Pakistan, remain at each other’s throat. The law level war between Indian and Pakistani intelligence services continues, expressed in accusations, and probable realities, of mutual interference of each other’s domestic politics, including sponsoring insurgency and terrorism. The nuclear rivalry between India and Pakistan is ongoing, as is the cycle of apparently warning diplomacy and return to confrontation that produce no basic change”.
What would be the strategic reverberations of the emergence of Indo-Pacific construct as far as other smaller states in South Asia including Sri Lanka are concerned? When South Asia is repositioned in the new strategic map of Indo-Pacific, it is no longer the center as in the case of the Indian Ocean. In the Indo-Pacific strategic construct, Southeast Asia becomes the center of the strategic theatre as South Asia is drifted westward on the map. It appears at a glance that the strategic significance of small states in South Asia is somewhat scaled down in the larger Indo-Pacific region. However, it must be emphasized that the conjuring up of the construct of Indo-Pacific by no means reduced the geo-political and geo-strategic significance of the Indian Ocean. It is expected that small States in the South Asia would benefit from growth dynamics of Southeast Asia and East Asia through Indo-Pacific construct. However, it also depends on how these countries leverage their linkages in the new strategic space to induce the growth centers in Indo-Pacific to transfer cutting-edge technology through investment and expand their market opportunities in Indo Pacific. The success of this drive is also conditional on a number of political and economic variables and it could have been achieved in the Indian Ocean framework also.
The spectacular rise of China offers both economic opportunities as well as vulnerabilities to the countries in the Indian Ocean littoral, including South Asia. China should be sensitive to these vulnerabilities aired in political discourses in South Asian countries. In the context of new strategic competition, if not rivalry, between the United States and China, these concerns are utilized by US to wean South Asian countries off from China. The ‘Indo-Pacific Strategy Report’ of 2018, published by US Department of Defence addresses this concern:
“While investment often brings benefits for recipient countries, including the United States, some of the China’s investments result in negative economic effects or costs to host country sovereignty. Chinese investment and project financing that bypass regular market mechanisms results in lower standards and reduced opportunities for local companies and workers, and can result in significant debt accumulation. One-sided and opaque deals are inconsistent with the principles of a free and open Indo-Pacific, and are causing concern in the region”1.
The defining factor of the geo-strategic conditions of the Indo-pacific region would be complex relations between India and China. The rapid pace of the rise of China and its more proactive foreign policy created a ‘security dilemma’ for both India and the United States. Hence, there is a strategic convergence between India and US in checkmating China. The United States finds India’s enhanced position useful to marginalize China in global politics and in the strategy of checkmating China in critically important Indo-Pacific with strategic alliance with Japan and Australia. It should not be forgotten that, as has been illustrated in many occasions, India always wants to keep its options open even though it strategically walks with the United States and its allies. India does not want to jeopardize its growing trade and other economic relations with China by playing overtly in the hands of the anti-Chinese forces. Even in the context of close Indo-Soviet strategic alliance in the 1970s, India’s did not endorse the Asian Collective Security Plan proposed by the Soviet Union, despite the earnest call made by Leonid Brezhnev in his speech before the Indian Parliament in November 1973. In 2018, India concluded a deal with Russia to purchase S-400 Air Defense System, ignoring US warning.1 Further, India’s readiness to ink the ‘Agreement on Reciprocal Logistical Support (ARLS) with the Russia in September 2019 reveals India’s eagerness to keep its options wide open.
Open and free Indo-Pacific region, if it is presented without covert geo-political ‘baggage’, would benefit all the stakeholders. It could be the point of convergence for a common action plan. In this context, as Robert D, Kaplan emphasized, the United States, as the established blue-water global power in the Indian and Pacific oceans, needs to redefine its role to suit the changed geo-strategic conditions, counting more on its soft power potential, rather than on the military power, to maintain its preponderance. According to Kaplan,
“For the first time since the Portuguese onslaught in the region in the early 16th century, West’s power there is in decline, however subtly and relatively. The Indians and the Chinese will enter into a dynamic great-power rivalry in these waters, with their shared economic interests as major trading partners locking them in an uncomfortable embrace. The United States, meanwhile, will serve as a stabilizing power in this newly complex area. Indispensability, rather than dominance, must be its goal”1
When the Indo-Pacific construct is perceived from an economic perspective, it is not an exclusive concept. By making an Indo-Pacific power, rather than remain as an Asia-Pacific power, the Indo-Pacific concept would provide China with a logistical rationale to pursue its geopolitical strategy linked with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the main foreign policy endeavor of China at present. However, China bears some reservations on the concept because of the way in which the concept has been projected. The fact that China is a critical geo-political and geo-strategic player in the Indo-Pacific region should not be forgotten. The integration of China and synergizing its economic strength with the rest of the economies in the Indo-Pacific to ensure and sustain ‘Asian prosperity’ in the new millennium is critically important for regional and global peace and stability. Furthermore, the Indo-Pacific construct can be viewed as a step towards the new phase of globalization propelled by the 4th industrial revolution. As far as interests of the small states in South Asia are concerned, the Indo-pacific Region should not be a theatre of a ‘New Cold War’ between China and the United States.
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi during the second day before the International Court of Justice in, The Hague, The Netherlands, on December 11. Photo: EPA
Thank you, Mr President and Members of the Court. It is an honour to appear as Agent of the Union of the Republic of Myanmar in these proceedings, in my capacity as Union Minister of Foreign Affairs. For materially less resourceful countries like Myanmar, the World Court is a vital refuge of international justice. We look to the Court to establish conditions conducive to respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law, one of the fundamental objectives of the United Nations Charter.
In the present case, Mr President, the Court has been asked to apply the 1948 Genocide Convention, one of the most fundamental multilateral treaties of our time. Invoking the 1948 Genocide Convention is a matter of utmost gravity. This is the treaty that we made following the systematic killing of more than six million European Jews, and that my country wholeheartedly signed as early as December 30, 1949 and ratified on March 14, 1956. Genocide is the crime that the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda applied in response to the mass-killing of perhaps 70 percent of the Tutsis in Rwanda. It is the crime that was not applied by the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to the displacement of approximately one million residents of Kosovo in 1999. Neither was it applied by that Tribunal nor by this Court when deciding upon the exodus of the Serb population from Croatia in 1995. In both situations international justice resisted the temptation to use this strongest of legal classifications because the requisite specific intent to physically destroy the targeted group in whole or in part was not present.
Regrettably, The Gambia has placed before the Court an incomplete and misleading factual picture of the situation in Rakhine State in Myanmar. Yet, it is of the utmost importance that the Court assess the situation obtaining on the ground in Rakhine dispassionately and accurately. The situation in Rakhine is complex and not easy to fathom. But one thing surely touches all of us equally: the sufferings of the many innocent people whose lives were torn apart as a consequence of the armed conflicts of 2016 and 2017, in particular those who have had to flee their homes and are now living in camps in Cox’s Bazar.
Mr President and Members of the Court, the troubles of Rakhine State and its population, whatever their background, go back into past centuries and have been particularly severe over the last few years. Currently, an internal armed conflict is going on there – between the Arakan Army, an organised Buddhist armed group with more than 5000 fighters, and the regular Myanmar Defence Services. None of the speakers yesterday made any reference to this. The Arakan Army seeks autonomy or independence for Rakhine – or Arakan as it was called – finding inspiration in the memory of the historic Kingdom of Arakan. This conflict has led to the displacement of thousands of civilians in Rakhine. Standard security restrictions – such as curfew and check-points – are in place at present in the conflict zone and affect the situation of civilians there, regardless of their background.
Mr President, on October 9, 2016, approximately 400 fighters of the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army – known as ARSA – launched simultaneous attacks on three police posts in Maungdaw and Rathedaung townships in northern Rakhine, near the border with Bangladesh. ARSA claimed responsibility for these attacks, which led to the death of nine police officers, more than 100 dead or missing civilians, and the theft of 68 guns and more than 10,000 rounds of am-munition. This was the start of an internal armed conflict between ARSA and Myanmar’s Defence Services which lasted until late 2017. The selective factual propositions contained in The Gambia’s Application actually concern this conflict.
In the months following the October 9, 2016 attacks, ARSA grew in strength in the Maungdaw, Buthidaung and Rathedaung townships in northern Rakhine. It resorted to threats and intimidation against local villagers in order to gain support and allegiance, executing suspected informers. According to, among others, the International Crisis Group, ARSA received weapons- and explosives-training from Afghan and Pakistani militants.
In the early morning of August 25, 2017, several thousand ARSA fighters launched coordinated attacks on more than 30 police posts and villages, and an army base in northern Rakhine. Most of the attacks took place on the narrow Maungdaw plain, which is framed by densely forested hills to the east, and the border with Bangladesh to the west. Indications are that ARSA’s objective was to seize Maungdaw township.
It may aid the Court to briefly consider the historical significance of Maungdaw. When Britain made Burma a colonial entity separate from British India in 1937, the border between Burma and India was drawn along the river Naf, where we find today’s border between Bangladesh and Myanmar. The historical Kingdom of Arakan had extended much further to the north than the river Naf, including most of what is today Chittagong District in Bangladesh. Members of some Rakhine communities therefore felt that the border drawn by the British was too far south; others, that it was too far north. Myanmar has never challenged this border since independence in 1948.
Britain did not lose control over what is today Maungdaw township during World War II. From September 1942, a number of local Muslim families offered fighters to the British irregular V-Force set up to collect intelligence and to initially absorb any Japanese advance. Many Muslims gave their lives in combat against the Japanese in Rakhine. The sacrifices made by Muslim fighters motivated a call for the creation of an autonomous Muslim space in northern Rakhine, centred on Maungdaw. Whether or not this was encouraged by British officers, Britain rejected this call as soon as it had reoccupied Burma, before independence in 1948. The Muslim-Buddhist intercommunal violence of 1942 recurred in 1948 and several times after that. This cycle of violence has negatively affected life in northern Rakhine, making it the second poorest state in Myanmar.
Mr President and Members of the Court, may I go back to the situation in Rakhine on the morning of August 25, 2017. More than thirty police stations and villages, and one military base, had been attacked before sunrise in a highly coordinated fashion, by an organised armed group operating along a densely forested hill-range that provides ample opportunity to hide. Many of the ARSA fighters had been recruited from local villages in the weeks and months preceding the attack. Myanmar’s Defence Services responded to the attacks of ARSA fighters by the use of ground forces. There were armed incidents in more than 60 locations. The main clashes occurred in 12 places: In Min Gyi (Tola Toli) village, Chut Pyin village, Maung Nu village, Gutar Pyin village, Alai Than Kyaw village, Myin Lut village, Inn Din village, Chein Kharli (Koetan Kauk) village, Myo Thugyi ward, Kyauk Pandu village, wards of Maungdaw Town, and southern Maungdaw.
Mr President, allow me to clarify the use of the term clearance operation” – nae myay shin lin yeh” in Myanmar [language]. Its meaning has been distorted. As early as the 1950s, this term has been used during military operations against the Burma Communist Party in Bago Range. Since then, the military has used this expression in counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism operations after attacks by insurgents or terrorists. In the Myanmar language, nae myay shin lin yeh” – literally clearing of locality” – simply means to clear an area of insurgents or terrorists.
It is still not easy to establish clear patterns of events in these 12 locations. Many ARSA fighters died. There may have been several hundred casualties in some of the 12 locations. There was some inter-communal violence. Buddhist and Hindu minority communities also feared for their security after the original ARSA attacks and many fled from their homes.
It may be worth noting that the use of air power in military operations was avoided as far as possible to minimise the risk of collateral damage. However, in one incident, in order to be able to extract a unit surrounded by hundreds of ARSA fighters, the use of a helicopter was required. There was shooting from the helicopter which resulted in fatalities, which may have included noncombatants.
Mr President, it cannot be ruled out that disproportionate force was used by members of the Defence Services in some cases in disregard of international humanitarian law, or that they did not distinguish clearly enough between ARSA fighters and civilians. There may also have been failures to prevent civilians from looting or destroying property after fighting or in abandoned villages. But these are determinations to be made in the due course of the criminal justice process, not by any individual in the Myanmar Government.
Please bear in mind this complex situation and the challenge to sovereignty and security in our country when you are assessing the intent of those who attempted to deal with the rebellion. Surely, under the circumstances, genocidal intent cannot be the only hypothesis.
Under its 2008 Constitution, Myanmar has a military justice system. Criminal cases against soldiers or officers for possible war crimes committed in Rakhine must be investigated and prosecuted by that system. On November 25, 2019, the Office of the Judge Advocate General announced the start of a court-martial for allegations linked to the Gutar Pyin village incident, one of the 12 main incidents referred to earlier. The Office also let it be known that there will be additional courts-martial if further incriminating evidence is brought by the Independent Commission of Enquiry. The ICOE is an independent special investigation procedure established for Rakhine allegations by the President of Myanmar, chaired by a former Deputy Foreign Minister from the Philippines, with three other members, including a former Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations from Japan.
On November 26, 2019, this Commission announced that it had taken about 1500 witness statements from all affected groups in Rakhine, and that it has interviewed 29 military personnel who were deployed to the affected townships in northern Rakhine during the military operations from August 25, 2017 to September 5, 2017, as well as 20 police personnel who were stationed at the police posts that were attacked on August 25, 2017. There is currently no other fact-finding body in the world that has garnered relevant first-hand information on what occurred in Rakhine in 2017 to the same extent as the Independent Commission of Enquiry and the Office of the Judge Advocate General in Myanmar.
This fact reinforces my sense that I should refrain from any action or statement that could undermine the integrity of these ongoing criminal justice processes in Myanmar. They must be allowed to run their course. It is never easy for armed forces to recognise self-interest in accountability for their members, and to implement a will to accountability through actual investigations and prosecutions. I respectfully invite the Members of the Court to consider for a moment the record of other countries. This is a common challenge, even in resource-rich countries.
Recent cases in the news headlines illustrate that even when military justice works, there can be reversals. This can also happen in Myanmar. As part of the overall efforts of the Myanmar Government to provide justice, a court-martial found that 10 Muslim men had been summarily executed in Inn Din village, one of the 12 locations of serious incidents referred to earlier. It sentenced four officers and three soldiers each to ten years in prison with hard labour. After serving a part of their sentences, they were given a military pardon. Many of us in Myanmar were unhappy with this pardon.
Other cases are undertaken without controversy. In the Mansi case, for example, a court-martial sat close to the location in Kachin State where three internally displaced civilians were killed. It sentenced six soldiers, each to 10 years in prison, in January 2018. Relatives of the victims and local civil society representatives were invited to the sentencing.
The Office of the Judge Advocate General in Myanmar is by our standards well-resourced, with more than 90 staff and a presence in all regional commands throughout the country. I am encouraged by the Gutar Pyin court-martial, and I expect the Office to continue its investigations and prosecutions based on reliable evidence collected in Rakhine and from persons who witnessed what happened there.
Can there be genocidal intent on the part of a state that actively investigates, prosecutes and punishes soldiers and officers who are accused of wrongdoing? Although the focus here is on members of the military, I can assure you that appropriate action will also be taken against civilian offenders, in line with due process. There will be no tolerance of human rights violations in the Rakhine, or elsewhere in Myanmar.
Mr President, there are those who wish to externalise accountability for alleged war crimes committed in Rakhine, almost automatically, without proper reflection. Some of the United Nations human rights mandates relied upon in the Application presented by The Gambia have even suggested that there cannot be accountability through Myanmar’s military justice system. This not only contradicts Article 20(b) of the Constitution of Myanmar, it undercuts painstaking domestic efforts relevant to the establishing of cooperation between the military and the civilian government in Myanmar, in the context of a Constitution that needs to be amended to complete the process of democratisation. That process is now underway at the Pyidaungsu Hluttaw, the Union Parliament.
The emerging system of international criminal justice rests on the principle of complementarity. Accountability through domestic criminal justice is the norm. Only if domestic accountability fails, may international justice come into play. It would be inconsistent with complementarity to require that domestic criminal justice should proceed much faster than international criminal justice. A rush to externalise accountability may undermine professionals in domestic criminal justice agencies. What does the appearance of competition between domestic and international accountability do to the public’s trust in the intentions of impatient international actors?
No stone should be left unturned to make domestic accountability work. It would not be helpful for the international legal order if the impression takes hold that only resource-rich countries can conduct adequate domestic investigations and prosecutions, and that the domestic justice of countries still striving to cope with the burden of unhappy legacies and present challenges is not good enough. The Gambia will also understand this challenge with which they too are confronted.
Mr President and Members of the Court, these reflections are relevant to the present hearing because the Applicant has brought a case based on the Genocide Convention. We are, however, dealing with an internal armed conflict, started by coordinated and comprehensive attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army, to which Myanmar’s Defence Services responded. Tragically, this armed conflict led to the exodus of several hundred thousand Muslims from the three northernmost townships of Rakhine into Bangladesh – just as the armed conflict in Croatia with which the Court had to deal led to the massive exodus of, first, ethnic Croats and later, ethnic Serbs.
As I have already stated, if war crimes have been committed by members of Myanmar’s Defence Services, they will be prosecuted through our military justice system, in accordance with Myanmar’s Constitution. It is a matter for the competent criminal justice authorities to assess whether, for example, there has been inadequate distinction between civilians and ARSA fighters, disproportionate use of force, violations of human rights, failure to prevent plundering or property destruction, or acts of forcible displacement of civilians. Such conduct, if proven, could be relevant under international humanitarian law or human rights conventions, but not under the 1948 Genocide Convention for reasons Professor William Schabas will elaborate in a moment.
Mr President, allow me to share one further reflection in this Great Hall of Justice. International law may well be our only global value system, and international justice a practice that affirms our common values. Leaders of States and relevant inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations should also be cognisant of their responsibility to express and affirm fundamental values. Feeding the flames of an extreme polarisation in the context of Rakhine, for example, can harm the values of peace and harmony in Myanmar. Aggravating the wounds of conflict can undermine unity in Rakhine. Hate narratives are not simply confined to hate speech – language that contributes to extreme polarisation also amounts to hate narratives.
Several international actors face a challenge here. But Myanmar could also have done more since the 1980s to emphasise the shared heritage and deeper layers of unity among the diverse peoples of our country. Cycles of inter-communal violence in Rakhine going back to the 1940s should be countered not just by practical measures aimed at sustainable development and rule of law, but also by nourishing a spiritual mindset of unity. It is a moral responsibility of leaders to guard the aspirations of people for harmony and peace.
U Thant, the third United Nations Secretary-General, had understood this. He wrote in his memoirs View From the UN published in 1974: I even believe that the mark of the truly educated and imaginative person facing the twenty-first century is that he feels himself to be a planetary citizen” (p. 454). Encouraging this added layer of identity – a sense of planetary citizenship – is of fundamental importance for peaceful relations between nations as well as ethnic and religious groups.
A commitment to broadening the mindset must go hand in hand with practical steps to improve lives. Even before the events of 2016-2017, Muslim, Buddhist and other communities in Rakhine faced what the Kofi Annan Advisory Commission described as complex challenges of low development and poverty rooted in enduring social conflict between the communities. The Myanmar government is committed to addressing these challenges. Together with our partners, we are now striving to ensure that all communities enjoy the same fundamental rights. To expedite citizenship verification and application, a mobile team is already in operation. All children born in Rakhine, regardless of religious background, are issued with birth certificates. Arrangements have been made to enable more Muslim youth to attend classes at universities across Myanmar. With the support of international and local partners, scholarships will also be made available to students from all communities living in Rakhine. The government has started a social cohesion model project in Maungdaw township, to promote social harmony among all communities. Inter-faith fora have been encouraged. These are some of the steps taken to improve livelihoods, security, access to education and health, citizenship, and social cohesion for all communities in Rakhine. Three IDP camps have already been closed, and an IDP-camp closure strategy has been adopted. Myanmar is also committed to voluntary, safe and dignified repatriation of displaced persons from Rakhine under the framework agreement reached between Bangladesh and Myanmar.
Mr President, how can there be an ongoing genocide or genocidal intent when these concrete steps are being taken in Rakhine?
To conclude, Mr President and Members of the Court, Rakhine today suffers an internal armed conflict between the Buddhist Arakan Army and Myanmar’s Defence Services. Muslims are not a party to this conflict, but may, like other civilians in the conflict area, be affected by security measures that are in place. We pray the Court to refrain from taking any action that might aggravate the ongoing armed conflict and peace and security in Rakhine. Right now, in northern Rakhine an army base near Paletwa is under attack by a group of more than 400 Arakan Army fighters, and some 200 insurgents have surrounded a military column near Ann City in Rakhine.
Since Myanmar gained independence in 1948, our people have not known the security of sustainable development that is the fruit of peace and prosperity. Our greatest challenge is to address the roots of distrust and fear, prejudice and hate, that undermine the foundations of our Union. We shall adhere steadfastly to our commitment to non-violence, human rights, national reconciliation and rule of law, as we go forward to build the Democratic Federal Union to which our people have aspired for generations past. We look to justice as a champion of the reconciliation and harmony that will assure the security and rights of all peoples.
Mr President and Members of the Court, I thank you for your kind attention and ask that you now call upon Professor William Schabas to continue the Myanmar submissions.
The TNA has woken up to the fact that the people are undergoing difficulties owing to the breakdown of the provincial administration in the North. It says annual transfers of state officials, under the Northern Provincial Council (NPC), cannot be effected without gubernatorial approval and, therefore, the government should appoint a Governor without further delay.
The TNA’s concerns should be appreciated, but here is a textbook example of irony. The TNA has a history of fighting running battles with Governors, whom it accused of usurping the devolved powers, under the previous Rajapaksa administration. It even demanded their removal. But, today, it is urging another Rajapaksa government to appoint a Governor!
The TNA should be asking the government to conduct the much-delayed provincial council polls to elect representatives to the Northern PC. Instead, it is demanding the appointment of a Governor, who will be a representative of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, whose election it went all out to prevent albeit in vain, claiming that the country would be headed for a dictatorship if he was elected President.
The question of the NCP or any other PC, for that matter, becoming inoperative would not have arisen if the previous government had not abused the Provincial Councils Elections (Amendment) Bill to postpone the PC polls indefinitely. It smuggled in several sections, sans judicial sanction into the Bill, at the committee stage, to put off the PC elections indefinitely. It was ably assisted in the task by the TNA, the JVP and the UPFA. Together, they made a mockery of their commitment to good governance.
Having shamelessly collaborated with the yahapalana government to deprive the people of their right to elect provincial councillors, the TNA is now complaining of the breakdown of the provincial administration in the North! It must be too embarrassing for the TNA to ask the new government to conduct the PC polls.
Chairman of the Elections Commission (EC) Mahinda Deshapriya minced no words, on 17 Nov., when he called upon President-elect Rajapaksa and other political leaders present at the Election Secretariat to conduct the PC polls, which, he jokingly said, had been made to disappear. None of the political parties seem to have heeded his call. All of them are now readying for a general election. It is now clear that though the yahapalana leaders and their cheerleaders boasted that the 19th Amendment would strengthen the independent commissions, the EC can only bark when the political authority meddles with the election schedule.
The delimitation process has got caught in a parliamentary logjam and until it is over and passed by Parliament, the delayed PC polls cannot be held either under the Proportional Representation system or the new mixed electoral system. The Review Committee report that the rejection by the House of the Delimitation Report necessitated was not presented to Parliament last year. There is reason to believe that the yahapalana government did not do so deliberately as it was scared of facing the PC polls. The Supreme Court has ruled that the President cannot conduct the PC elections until the Delimitation report is completed and passed by Parliament. Everything that the yahapalana legal pundits touched turned into an unholy mess. Now, it is up to Parliament to rectify the situation by making new laws.
The TNA and the UNP have created a situation where the Governors, appointed by the President, are ruling the provinces in the absence of elected councillors, and thereby proved that the country can do without the PCs. It is, therefore, doubtful whether they will be able to obtain a popular mandate for devolving any more powers. There have been calls, in some quarters, for the abolition of the PC system, which has become a drain on the public purse and led to an administrative mess. They have struck a responsive chord with the people who pay through the nose to maintain nine white elephants.
Gambia
is a Muslim majority state and member of 57-OIC states. Gambia on behalf of OIC
has taken Myanmar to the ICJ on charges of ‘genocide’. The more important
question is why has Gambia or the OIC not take US or NATO to ICJ for all of the
bombings and killings in Iraq, Afghanistan and scores of other Muslim-majority
nations? Why are Muslim nations simply watching Muslims get killed by US-NATO while
a surprising number of Muslim nations are even siding with US NATO making us
ask why are Muslims helping to kill Muslims but championing the cause of
Muslims!
ICJ & ICC
ICJ
was set up in 1946 to adjudicate issues between nations.
ICC
was set up in 2002 with jurisdiction to prosecute
individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity,
war crimes, and crimes of aggression. United
States, China, India, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Qatar and Israel are not
members. 139 States have signed the Rome
Statute, while only 118 have ratified.
Gambia
became the 3rd country to threaten to leave ICC in 2016 when South
Africa and Burundi formerly announced their departures. Ironically, ICC Chief
Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, is Gambian. Of ICC’s 6
cases all have been only against Africa nations. Gambia’s information minister
claims at least 30 western countries have committed war crimes against since
ICC was founded but ICC has done nothing against them. Why didn’t Gambia take
this complaint to the ICJ?
According
to the US – Gambia acted as conduit to terror financing (Tajideen brothers, supporting the Iran-backed
Lebanese terror group Hezbollah)
Prof Anthony Clark
Arend of Georgetown University says an ‘invasion’ must meet 3 criteria
Violates UN Charter Article 2 Paragraph 4 member
states shall refrain from threat or use of force against the territorial or
political independence of any state”
Didn’t qualify as permitted except for use of force
under UN Charter. Charter allows military action in case of ‘self-defense if an
armed attack occurs” or if UNSC authorizes armed force.
Foreign ground troops entering another country.
Under this criteria
the following constitute invasions
Grenada invasion by 5000 US troops on
25 Oct 1983 which 5
members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States and UNGA adopted a
resolution disapproving invasion. UNSC Disapproval Resolution failed due to US
veto.
Panama invasions between 1988 &
1990 by US sending troops to support the 10,000 US troops already stationed in
Panama. UNGA passed
resolution condemning invasion but UNSC disapproval resolution was vetoed by US
– UK & France
Iraq invasion in 2003 to oust Saddam Hussein did not have UN approval and UNSG Kofi Annan
declared it ‘illegal’
Military historian
Lance Janda of Cameron University defines ‘invasion’ as ‘seizure of territory
by military force from the government of another country, regardless of
motivation or justification’. Thus US invasions on Muslim nations include
Kuwait in 1991
Iraq in 1991
Afghanistan in 2001
Somalia in 1992
Haiti – 1994/1995 but US received UN backing to
reinstall ousted Jean-Bertrand Aristide
Bosnia 1990s – US & NATO with UN support
Kosovo 1990s – US & NATO – UN did not support
directly
Libya 2011 – US & NATO with UN support
US-NATO
airstrikes on Sudan in 1998, Mali, Angola and Syria.
In 2016
alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs on 7 Muslim
nations. US has been illegally occupying Afghanistan since 2001 – why is Gambia
and OIC not taking US-NATO to the ICJ at least!
Nearly
half of US arms exports go to the Middle East – Saudi Arabia is world’s
second biggest importer and these are being dumped on Yemen leading to a
humanitarian crisis. Why is the OIC silent on a fellow Islamic country suffering
malnutrition and starvation! Why are OIC nations not going to Yemen’s
assistance?
Yemen
9
Muslim countries joined an
alliance to bomb Yemen in 2015 – Egypt, Morocco, Jordan, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain. Other Muslim countries provided
logistics support – Djibouti, Eritrea,
and Somalia made their airspace, territorial
waters, and military bases available to the coalition.
In
October 2018, United Nations warned 13 million were faced with starvation
in one of “the worst famine in the world in 100 years.” 85,000
Yemeni children have died from hunger – how many of the OIC Muslim nations came
to feed Yemen?
Al
Qaeda, Bin Laden and all of their Islamic militant outfits are proscribed
internationally and declared foreign terrorist organisations. But they are all
Muslims and they are used by the West to inflict harm and terror on mostly
Muslim nations that the West wishes to either keep destable or wish to place
Western boots on ground.
Why
are Muslim countries allowing their nationals to enroll in these terror camps
to inflict harm to a fellow Muslim nation. The West are providing the arms,
ammunition, training etc but the terrorists are all Muslims and easily enrolled
even after scores and scores are just killed by the very arms that the West
gives each Islamic terror group. These facts are nothing no one knows about.
But they are not spoken or put on to the table openly. It is taboo to ask why
Muslims are killing Muslims. It is taboo to ask why Muslim nations are not
taking Muslim asylum seekers or refugees especially by the richer Muslim
majority nations. If Rohingyas are living unhappily, shouldn’t the 57 Member
states magnanimously divide the people and welcome them to their nations? Why do
Rohingyas end up being dumped by UNHCR to non-Muslim nations – is it to
purposely create tensions after they start increasing their flock?
But
Gambia and OIC are not bothered to stop Muslims from killing Muslims, or ensure
Muslims do not enroll in any of the terrorist movements created and armed by
the West or feed the Muslims that are in hunger or having issues but Gambia can
exploit a little-known and rare-invoked provision in the 1948 Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and take Myanmar to the ICJ.
Why didn’t Gambia or OIC do the same against US and NATO nations for the
killings and destructions caused to Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen
etc? While Myanmar’s case is only an allegation, there are enough of statistics
and evidence against the US-NATO nations and their leaders for their role in
the killings of innocent people.
ICJ’s
first genocide convention case against Serbia in 1993 took 14 years to declare
Serbia had violated its duty to prevent and punish genocide in
Bosnia-Herzegovina. As for the alleged Srebrenica massacre ‘genocide’ given
much hype turned out to be a political lie – eventually Serbian leader
Milosevic was also exonerated of allegations of war crimes but sadly he had
mysteriously died in his prison cell. The international justice system had
failed – had lied and had left a leader dead. There was no ‘genocide’ only some
So to Gambia and OIC member states what’s the deal in taking Myanmar to ICJ for ‘genocide’ or does this have anything to do with playing your role in encircling China/Russia via Myanmar or alternatively India?
No. No way. An embassy would never try that kind of lark now, would it? It’s incredulous. Unthinkable. Out of the questions. Well, such sentiments are not out of order, really. Nations and embassies do indulge in all kinds of nefarious activities. They are careful about it. Even the most powerful nations don’t want to take the risk of looking like global idiots. The Swiss Embassy in Colombo, one must assume, is not an exception. And yet, the saga of the Sri Lankan employee allegedly abducted, questioned and sexually harassed, does make one wonder.
Let’s consider the sequence of events. At 9.44 pm on November 26, 2019, a website with a sordid back story ‘reveals’ that a female Sri Lankan employee of the Swiss Embassy had been abducted in a white van on the previous day and that the Swiss Ambassador was to meet Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa on the following day regarding this incident.
The Embassy did not lodge any complaint regarding this abduction until the Ambassador met with the Prime Minister. This is strange considering the seriousness of the matter. Nevertheless, a Swiss website, quoting the Sri Lankan website reported the incident.
Upon being informed by the Ambassador, the Prime Minister moved to deploy a team led by Acting IGP, Chandana Wickamaratne and the Director, CID, Senior SP W. Thilakaratne. The Swiss Embassy, strangely, refused to provide any information to these officers. However, after investigations were thus launched, the Swiss did lodge an official complaint with the Police, under the signature of the Ambassador, no less. Rather late in the day so to speak, of course.
And yet, the Swiss were cagey about the identity of the ‘victim’. According to the complaint, she had left the Embassy around 4.15 in a Uber cab, stating that she had to attend a parents’ meeting at St Bridget’s Convent, the school her two daughters attended. The Embassy also stated in the complaint that she had been abducted near the school by persons in a white van and that she was harassed and sexually assaulted. Her personal mobile phone had apparently been confiscated and examined, the complaint also claimed. She had also been questioned about her relationship with Inspector of Police, Nishantha Silva, a man who recently fled the country, apparently to evade investigation and possible arrest. The investigators, whose work was deliberately blocked by the Embassy, turned their attention to CCTV footage in and around both the Embassy and the school. There was absolutely no evidence of any abduction of the kind alleged. However, they found out, from school records, the name of the alleged victim: Ganiya Banister Francis is her name and she had been resident in an apartment complex in Maligakanda.
On the said day, the lady had not, contrary to the claims of the Embassy, attended any parents’ meeting on November 25. One teacher had called the parents of eight students, but this group did not include the ‘victim’s’ daughters. Perusal of phone call records and information from the can service revealed that she had in fact left the Embassy in an Uber vehicle, red in color. Accordingly, the investigators were able to obtain information of the lady’s movements that day. She had not gone to St Bridget’s Convent. Instead she had gone to the house of a teacher in Bambalapitiya. After about an hour and a half she had proceeded to Maligakanda in the same vehicle. There’s CCTV footage of a woman matching the description given by the Uber driver getting into a three wheeler, but it was not possible to identify the number of the vehicle.
When the CID visited the apartment complex, her mother had simply said that her daughter had collected her clothes and gone abroad. Indeed, on December 1, Secretaries of the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, along with other officials, visited the Embassy and appraised the Ambassador about these findings and obvious discrepancies. They requested access to the victim in order to obtain a statement˘. The Embassy has stubbornly insisted that her health condition is deteriorating and that a Swiss doctor has ascertained the same via a video conversation. They refused. The Embassy has requested that permission be given to airlift her to Switzerland along with her family. Interestingly the lady’s husband, a bank employee has gone missing. There is no word on their daughters. In any event, this is not legally possible. A court order has now temporarily stopped her from leaving Sri Lanka. Summons have been issued at all possible addresses of her husband, including the bank that employs him to appear in court. It makes sense. There’s a wild accusation against Sri Lanka. The Swiss are blocking investigation. Their story is full of holes. There’s every reason to suspect that the Swiss either fell hook, line and sinker to a tall tale concocted by a Sri Lankan employee or else is party to a sordid conspiracy poorly executed, aimed at tarnishing Sri Lanka’s name and of course that of the newly elected president. White vans, one observes, have amounted to a tired and highly exaggerated story used for political purposes by the previous regime and conveniently picked and further inflated by certain sections of the so-called international community intent on punishing Sri Lanka for essentially subverting an outcome preference related to the denouement of the war against terrorism. In other words, to use the trope, the Swiss Embassy, knowingly or unknowingly now finds itself mired in an effort to ‘white van’ Sri Lanka.
malindasenevi@gmail.com This article was first published in ‘The Sunday Morning’ [December 8, 2019]
The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) yesterday questioned Swiss Embassy employee Garnier Banister Francis aka Sriyalatha for the third day, Dec 10.
Having been in the protective care of the Swiss Embassy, Colombo, Sriyalatha reported to the CID headquarters on Sunday, Dec 08.
On behalf of Sriyalatha, Swiss Ambassador Hanspeter Mock on Nov 27 complained to Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa of the alleged abduction of the staffer on Nov 25.
The police identified the embassy employee as the daughter-in-law of Bevan Perera, who contested the Gampaha District on the UNP ticket at the 2010 parliamentary election.
Sources said that Bevan Perera had switched allegiance to the UNP along with the late Anura Bandaranaike.
Sources said that the police were in the process of verifying her statement. Responding to another query, sources pointed out that Swiss Ambassador Mock’s statement had been proved not factual and the envoy himself told about the outcome. Sources said that her statements were being examined vis-a-vis Ambassador’ Mock’s complaint and the revelations made by the CID following investigations into Swiss complaint.
The Fort Chief Magistrate has prohibited the embassy employee leaving the country till Dec 12.
Meanwhile, UPFA Kalutara District MP Piyal Nishantha de Silva said that MP Dr. Rajitha Senaratne, who claimed that the embassy staffer had been threatened by putting a pistol into her mouth should be questioned.
Authoritative
sources told The Island that the inquiry was now primarily focused on
the embassy employee in the absence of any evidence to back
Ambassador’s Mock’s accusations.
The allegedly abducted locally recruited Swiss Embassy staffer Garnia Banister Francis was escorted to the CID again after she was produced for a medical examination today.
She was produced before the Colombo Judicial Medical Office after the CID recorded a statement for four hours.
Her statements were recorded today for the third day.
Later, the embassy staffer left the CID after recording fresh statements this evening.
Meanwhile, a close associate of the Embassy staffer, who introduced himself as Manjula Perera invited the media to a house on Barnes Place yesterday.
Several media crews including our news team waited at that particular house for the whole of yesterday but neither Manjula Perera nor the embassy staffer turned up to make a statement.
Meanwhile, our news team learnt that the true owner of the particular house on Barnes Place is domiciled in Australia.
She informed our news team; she bought the house from the wife of Manjula Perera in February last year.
At the same time, it is reported that Manjula Perera who lied to the media is believed to be a close associate of the Embassy staffer.
However, it is not confirmed yet whether he is the husband of the Embassy staffer.
In the meantime, UNP former electoral organizer of Kelaniya Bevan Perera verified that Manjula Perera is his son.
The
International Court of Justice was set up in 1946 to settle international
disputes. ICJ is taking up a complaint made by little known Muslim majority
Gambia on behalf of the 57 OIC member states against Myanmar. Aung San Su Kii,
Myanmar’s leader along with Government officials and scores of supporters
arrived in Hague and faced the ICJ on 10th December 2019. ICJ cannot
evade answering the legal status of Rohingyas in Myanmar vis a vis the colonial
legacy that Myanmar carries. Is Rohingya issue an excuse for Western
imperialists and its OIC partners to enter Asia with real intent to encircle
China/Russia while as an additional bonus acquiring Asia’s natural
resources/oil etc? Should Asia not be concerned about the geopolitical aspect
of the Rohingya issue, a factor India must be concerned about too. Both India
& Myanmar are on line to be balkanized as western imperialist with their
Islamic state partners strategically draw the pawns on the chessboard.
Historical anomalies by Western Colonial/Islamic
invaders cannot be unjustly used against post-independent victim countries under
periphery of international bodies set up by them & influenced by them
Colonial legacy
The British
colony of Burma was made part of the British run-state in India
(though Burma was never part of pre-colonial British India), the Empire
of India, from 1824 to 1937. A
decade before India was given independence Burma was separated from the Indian
Empire in 1937. Burma was actually the geographically largest province in
India, it only had 9 million people in 1908. Its neighbor Bengal (East Bengal
became Bangladesh) had 75million people. In 1872, when the earliest reliable
census was taken, the highest concentrations of Muslims (more than 70%) were
found in eastern Bengal. It is only from
the late sixteenth century, and after the Mughal conquest (1574), that solid
evidence of a Muslim peasant population anywhere in Bengal.
Also
noteworthy is the formation of the Muslim League in 1906 demanding a separate
Muslim ‘homeland’ in British India.
When Burma became Burma – India became India.
Legacy of CONQUER –
COMMERCE – CONVERT continues
Artificial borders drawn by colonial invaders is one of the main
reasons for contentions between nations even today. Forced migrations and
dumping of indentured labor is another factor that has given rise to more
ethnic problems in former colonies. Colonial rulers of these nations must take
accountability for these intended divide and rule policies. Many a separatist
ethno-religious movement today were encouraged and covertly funded by these
countries a policy they continue to practice even in 21st century.
Trail of insurgent/terrorist movements will take you to one or more of the
western imperial or OIC member states who secretly support them. Drive for
global hegemony, land grab in resource-rich countries are very much the same
reason then and now. We cannot be naïve not to link the similarities.
Obsession with
China/Russia
An additional feature has become the obsession with China’s
development. The aim is to get to China and Russia either through Myanmar or
India. These endeavors are happening parallel through various modus operandi. Unfortunately,
India has invited the enemy to Asia and must be regretting now.
It is reason why Asia must back Myanmar including the Muslim
majority countries for no Rohingya can be more important than helping turn Asia
into a war zone similar to Middle East. Once countries allow an enemy that does
not think twice to drop chemical bombs/drones etc no ICJ or ICC can stop them.
The crime of ‘Genocide’ means acts committed with the intent
to destroy, in whole or in part, a national or racial group. It has become
fashionable to use term ‘genocide’ but population statistics cannot prove any
reduction in population figures for Rohingyas. However, the ‘intent to destroy
a racial group’ did very much take place by colonial/Islamic expansionists
wherein they used to sword to exterminate entire populations. Who is going to
hold their crimes to account?
Presume
the ‘international bodies’ deem it is old news, what about the illegal
invasions & killings by carpet bombings, chemical bombings, atomic bombs,
drone killings that have killed millions too in this side of the century? Were
these not committed by Western/Middle East nations – the most recent being the
bombing campaign in Yemen. How is it that these acts do not make it to the
‘genocide’ table? Why are these not investigated or action taken against them?
Is it because their political power and financial influence makes all others
lesser than them?
How innocent are Rohingyas
Are
Rohingyas illegal immigrants, did colonial Britain include them in their census
are questions that need firm answers. How innocent are Rohingyas when it is
having an armed group & has also committed heinous crimes against Myanmar
people in particular Buddhist theros. Are OIC-member states arming the
Rohingyas as ICG report 2016 confirms.
Can
Gambia explain how Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army if innocent is carrying ARMS
& AMMUNITION and also engaged in attacks? Who provides weaponry to ARSA and
who is paying for this supply?
Myanmar
cannot be accused and hurled up before any international court if it is only
defending its nation & people against armed militant Rohingya. If Myanmar was
attacking unarmed Rohingya it would be a different story but Rohingyas are no
innocent people!
Why
don’t these 57 majority Muslim nations agree to give refuge to these Rohingyas
in their countries and look after them as fellow Muslim nations where they
would be all the happier?
Myanmar’s Buddhist heritage at risk
It
is no secret that the Buddhist world expanded from Persia to far East Asia
without forced conversion or sword.
It
is also no secret that the Buddhist world has shrunk as a result of the sword
used by both Islamic expansionists and Christian invaders. The Buddhist world
is now down to just 5 shrinking and regularly under threat majority Buddhist
nations of which Myanmar and Sri Lanka are included. It is natural that the
Buddhists in these countries have every right to fear and these fears should
not be laughed upon or degraded.
While
ancient tactics are not used the multiple methods presently used are more
sinister and dangerous and come in the cover of many insidious forms that cover
the real intent (loans/grants are given with hidden message to turn the other
way to incursions / politicians are bribed to also do the same / powerful
international blocs ensure international pressure to prevent any legal actions
taken to protect the incursions).
India,
China, Russia and rest of Asia must take stock of the geopolitical agenda
behind using Rohingyas just as Sri Lanka’s Tamils have been used to similarly
exert power to influence Sri Lanka to give in to various bullying tactics. When
it is very clear that the target is China & Russia, the two barriers are
India & Myanmar and it is natural that Rohingyas provide the best pawn to
use to exert international pressure and presence in Myanmar as bogus conflict
resolutionists whereby on the ground they will subtly plan to encircle
China/Russia.
Asia
must stand in solidarity with Myanmar and China, Russia and India must protect
all Asian nations from numerous other manipulated tactics that will be used in
time to come.
My dear Ambassador Mock, It may be that you are so dumb not to understand the racist mentality of the world’s number one liars the racist Sri Lankan Tamils, or you were involved in coocking up of a failed attempt to campaign against Rajapakse government. You need 100 lies to cover a lie. Tamil local staffer put you in an embarrasing situation in the eyes of the civilised society. You are caught up with your pants down. Lies, lies and more lies is the motto of the bogus Tamil refugees scattered all over the western countries. Bash Rajapakse government campaign will extend their visas. Those bogus Tamil refugees’s suvival rest upon the mercy of the host countries. They need to tell the world through lies of victimisation and not a safe country to the Tamils expecting the western countries sympathy. Tamils in Sri Lanka are illegal immigrants from Tamil Nadu. They do not seek refuge in India. Those bogus Tamil refugees seek refugee status only in the western countries and those western countries jump into the band waggon to secure the votes. The Tamil diaspora contributed to Hillary Clinton’s Presidential elction campaign fund a sum of $125,000. Then Hillary Clinton said there are good terrorists to white wash LTTE Terrorist. If a white man joinig the bash Rajapakse government, it means they expect the Bogus Tamil Refugees to vote for their political party. There are 25,000 Bogus Tamil Refugees in Switzerland. Hanspeter Mock the Swiss Ambassador in Colombo is playing the game of politics and not playing the diplomacy. Corrupt Mock’s lie about the abduction and sexually assaulting of Local Tamil Staffer is a drama authored by the Bogus Tamil Refugees to tarnish the image of Rajapakse’s week old new government hoping their visas extention and more and more Tamils to leave for the western countries. Native Sri Lankan Sinhalese are clever to understand the motive behind the local Tamil staffer: 1. To cover up the smuggling out of Sri lanka of a crimal and wanted Tamil police officer Silva and bring disrepute to a week old Rajapakse government. 2. To highligt the fact that Sri Lanka is not safe to the Tamils which was in conniving with the Bogus Tamil Refugees. Whatever it is one thing is for sure that Swiss Ambassadore Hanspeter Mock became a disgraceful liar and a Tamil sucker. It is now up to the Swiss Ambassador Hanspeter Mock to leave Sri Lanka ASAP if Sri Lanka did not deport the roiuge Ambassador. Please make sure when you go to take with you the lying and disgraceful Tamil staffer together with over a million lying Tamils living in the North of Sri Lanka. When you did that we peace loving patriotic Sri Lankans can live in peace and harmony. Yours Truly, Stanley Perera Melbourne, Australia.
Western Civilization Is Now A Caricature of Absurdity –
PaulCraigRoberts.org
Western Civilization Is Now A Caricature of Absurdity. This Is
Not A Joke. Dear Readers: If you have concluded that a small handful of
crazed morons control the words we are permitted to use, you are correct.
www.paulcraigroberts.org
Officials, donors and well-wishers led by Union Ministers Dr Myo
Thein Gyi and Nai Thet Lwin attend the third mass alms-giving ceremony
for 30,000 monks at the Chanmyathazi Airport in Mandalay
yesterday. Photo: MNA
Supervised by Mandalay Region
Government, Myanmar well-wishers and Thailand’s Dhammakaya Foundation
jointly organized third mass alms-giving for 30,000 monks at the
Chanmyathazi Airport in Mandalay yesterday.
Present at the event were Union Ministers Dr Myo Thein Gyi and Nai Thet
Lwin, Deputy Minister U Kyi Min, Mandalay Region Minister for
Electricity, Energy and Construction U Zarni Aung on behalf of Mandalay
Region Chief Minister, Mandalay Region Hluttaw Speaker U Aung Kyaw Oo
and cabinet members, Hluttaw representatives, departmental officers,
consuls general of the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of
India, invited guests, social organizations, donors from Thailand and
well-wishers.
Mandalay Region Minister U Zarni Aung and Deputy Minister U Kyi Min
lighted candles, and representatives from Myanmar and Thailand offering
flowers, the alms-giving ceremony was opened with the three-time
recitation of Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa” .
That was followed by the congregation receiving the Five Precepts from
the State Sangha Maha Nayaka Committee member Sayadaw Thanlyin Min
Kyaung Sayadaw Agga Maha Pandita Bhaddanta Candima Bhivumsa.
Union Minister Nai Thet Lwin and officials donate offertories to the Members of Sangha at the alms-giving ceremony. Photo: MNA
Afterwards, the audio message sent by
Luang Por Dhammajayo, the patron of Dhammakaya Monastery in Thailand,
was played and Members of Sangha recited parittas.
Six donors from Thailand led the recitation of offering the Four Requisites and donated offertories to the monks.
Supplicating the Members of Sangha at the event, patron of the
alms-giving organizing committee Mandalay Region minister for
Electricity, Energy and Construction U Zarni Aung on behalf of Mandalay
Region Chief Minster expressed delights for getting opportunity for
doing merits by peoples of Myanmar and Thailand.
Deputy Minister U Kyi Min supplicated religious matters, Thai donors
expressed delights and followed by U Soe Lin, the chairman of the
alms-giving event organizing committee, saying words of thanks.
The congregation listened to the sermon given by Mogok Nyaung Thone Bin
Pariyatti Thamanaykyaw Monastery Sayadaw Dr Bhaddanta Tejosara Bhivamsa
and shared merits they gained.
The ceremony concluded after reciting Buddha Sasanam Ciram Titthatu” three times.
The officials, donors and well-wishers led by Union Ministers Dr Myo
Thein Gyi and Nai Thet Lwin donated K 30,000 each monk and offertories
to the Members of Sangha.
Foods and soft drinks for congregation were also donated by well-wishers
at the event. The first Myanmar-Thai friendship alms-giving ceremony
was held for 10,000 monks on 20 September 2015 at the foot of the
Mandalay Hill and the second was held for 20,000 monks on 21 January
2018 at the Chanmyathasi Airport. This was the third alms-giving in
Mandalay and donated to 30,000 monks. —Min Htet Aung (Sub-Printing House) (Translated by Kyaw Zin Tun)
Thousands of
supporters in Myanmar have waved banners and colorful portraits of State
Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, on Saturday, December 7, in a show of their
loyalty on the eve of her departure for the U.N.’s top court i.e. International
Court of Justice (ICJ), to face genocide charges over the Rohingya crisis.
One supporter named
Damien Chakma in a comment on the Internet has said:
What Suu Kyi is
doing is absolute right, protecting Myanmar’s interest in the face of OIC
funded propaganda. So called Rohingyas are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. Where was ICJ and UN when Bangladesh was ethnic cleansing Buddhist
tribes (Chakma, Marma, Tripura etc.) from Chittagong Hill Tracts?”
China, Russia,
Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, and several other countries such as Ukraine and
Israel, have unreservedly given their unqualified support to Myanmar at the UN.
India, is sympathetic towards Myanmar and on December 09, passed legislation
amending India’s Citizenship laws excluding Rohingyas from seeking asylum in
India or claiming Indian Citizenship on the basis of Muslim refugees.
The Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made a two-day visit to
Myanmar at the invitation of State Counselor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi on December
07.
U
Maung Maung Soe, a political analyst, has said that When it comes to the
Rohingya issue, China has always shown their strong support for Myanmar,”
Myanmar is highly likely to discuss with China how
the country has prepared for the lawsuit, and China will likely give Myanmar
some tips for the hearings as well,” said U Maung Maung Soe.
He added that China does not want to see Myanmar get
into trouble, as the country is strategically and geographically important for
China’s agenda and its sphere of influence in the region.
In another
development, Twenty-eight supporters from Myanmar on Sunday (December 08)
joined Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in her trip to The Hague.
U Kyaw Htay Oo, one
of the supporters, said that ICJ case is related to all Myanmar citizens
because it could have huge impact on the dignity of the country.
It is not only a
case for Daw Aung San Suu Kyi or the Military,” he told The Myanmar Times.
“We want to show that we always follow and obey the leader we believe in.
Therefore, we are supporting our leader with all the money and all the people
we have.”
The 28 supporters
are spending around US$2,000 per person for a round trip to The Hague. According
to the supporters, they are going to The Hague using their own money.
The ICJ will hold
hearings in the case from Tuesday to Thursday (December 10 – 12, 2019).
About 350
supporters of Myanmar based in European countries such as France and Norway will
also be travelling to The Hague during the hearing of the case.
Earlier on Saturday
(December 07), thousands of people gathered at the administrative capital of
Nay Pyi Taw to show their support for the State Counsellor.
Gambia’s lawsuit
Gambia, acting on
behalf of the Organization of Islamic Co – operation (OIC), has filed a lawsuit
against Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), allegedly on the
ground of committing the crime of Genocide.
The Government of
Myanmar has taken up the challenge to contest this case at the ICJ and the
State Counsellor, Aung San Suu Kyi, in her capacity as the Minister for
Foreign Affairs, will lead the legal team to defend her nation.
Myanmar’s legal
team is expected to argue that genocide did not occur, that the top U.N. court
lacks jurisdiction and that the case fails to meet a requirement that a dispute
exists between Myanmar and Gambia.
Under the Charter
of the United Nations (UN), all member states of the UN, including Myanmar, are
bound by the Statute of the ICJ.
The crime of
‘Genocide’ means acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in
part, a national or racial group. It is an issue that concerns all civilized
nations and peoples, especially those who were victims of colonial rule during
the last 500 years against whom much of the brazen acts of Genocide were
committed in many parts of the world.
Both the Government of Myanmar and its armed forces face many internal
problems related to ethnic tensions. Turning to recent
events in Myanmar, the ARSA (Arakan Rohingya Salvation
Army) with links to radical Islamic terrorist groups have been responsible in
Rakhine for acts of terrorism and slaughter of the innocents.
The
ICG reported on 14 December 2016 that in interviews, the leaders of ARSA
claimed to have links to private individuals in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The ICG also claimed in unconfirmed reports
that Rohingya villagers had been “secretly trained” by Afghan and
Pakistani fighters.
On
25 August 2017, Hindu villages in a cluster known as Kha Maung Seik in the
northern Maungdaw District of Rakhine State in Myanmar were attacked and 99 Bengali Hindu villagers were massacred, by Muslim insurgents from the Arakan
Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA). A
month later, the Myanmar Army discovered mass graves containing the corpses of 45 Hindus, most
of whom were women and children.
Ni Maul, a Hindu leader who helped Myanmar’s authorities with
the search of the bodies, told the media that the mass-graves were found from
testimony of eight Hindu women whose lives were spared and brought to
Bangladesh after they agreed to convert to Islam.
Four Hindu women in Bangladesh told Agence-France Presse that they were among the
eight who escaped. They stated that they were forced to marry the attackers in
order to save their lives and they were later taken to camps of Rohingya
Muslims in Bangladesh.
The Hindu women stated that the militants found them beautiful
and decided to convert them. They added that later the eight women along with
children were taken to a house in Bawtalar village where they were forced to
eat rice with meat, which is prohibited in their religion. They were then
brought to Kutuparlaung refugee camp on August 28 where they were housed with
Muslims and forced to wear burqas.
The
Myanmar authorities accused the Arakan
Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA)
of perpetrating the Hindu massacre in the Kha Maung Seik area.
Tirana
Hassan, Crisis Response Director at Amnesty International,
said, ″It’s hard to ignore the sheer brutality of ARSA’s actions, which have
left an indelible impression on the survivors we’ve spoken to.…………….In this
brutal and senseless act, members of ARSA captured scores of Hindu women, men,
and children and terrorized them before slaughtering them outside their own
villages. The perpetrators of this heinous crime must be held to account″.
On 25 August 2017, the Arakan Rohingya
Salvation Army (ARSA) claimed
responsibility for coordinated attacks on police posts and an attempted raid on
an army base. The Myanmar government announced a death toll of 77 Rohingya
insurgents and 12 security forces in northern Maungdaw following
the attacks. The government stated that they had attacked a police station in
the Maungdaw District with a handmade bomb alongside
the coordinated attacks on several police posts.
In late August 2017, the Burmese government accused ARSA of
killing 12 civilians, including Hindus and Muslims, some of whom were suspected
by ARSA of being government informants. On 24 September 2017, Myanmar’s
military accused ARSA of killing 28 Hindus in Ye Baw Kya village in the
previous month after they uncovered their bodies in a mass grave
The elected Government of
Myanmar with a mandate to protect the citizens of Myanmar, had no choice but to
send its armed forces to Rakhine in order to protect Buddhists, Hindus, and
various indigenous Tribal Groups, who faced the wrath of ARSA and the Bengali
Muslims who have infiltrated Rakhine heavily with intent to grab land and
dispossess the original inhabitants namely the citizens of Myanmar, from their
traditional home land in Rakhine.
A propaganda war has been
launched against Myanmar by the OIC and the highly prejudiced international
media such as Al Jazeera that totally ignores the Bengali Muslim land grab that
blights Rakhine, the Chittagong Hill Tracts (Bangladesh), and various parts of
India including Assam.
A similar situation of
organized and co -ordinated violence arose in Sri Lanka, when on Easter Sunday
April 21, 2019, suicide bombers linked to radical Islamic terrorist groups
killed 259 people and injured over 500 people. Three churches and three luxury hotels in
Colombo were targeted in a series of coordinated terrorist suicide
bombings.
Both Myanmar and
Sri Lanka have a shared past linked to Theravada Buddhism running for over a
thousand years. History shows that both countries had assisted each other in
times of crisis when the survival of each country was at stake. An existential
threat from a common source intending to displace Buddhism in both countries
persists today. This trend is clearly visible in the narrative of the
disappearance and replacement of Buddhism in several Asian countries during the
last one thousand years.
The Dharmic (Indo –
Buddhist) world must take cognizance of these historical developments and ask
the question whether the current happenings in Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand
(all Theravada Buddhist countries now besieged ) are but a continuation of a
calibrated process set in motion over a thousand years ago to dislodge and
finally replace Buddhism from its traditional primacy in Buddhist Asia.
It is worthy of
note that Indian civilizational influence outside India prevails largely in
Buddhist countries of Asia. The failure to counter aggressive Abrahamic
incursions can only lead to the shrinking of Buddhist and Hindu space in South
Asia, South East Asia and the Far East. It is in India’s long – term interest
as a rising world power to extend both support and protection to countries
where India’s Dharmic civilizational influence prevails and continues to be
valued and deeply respected.
What can India and
Buddhist majority countries do at the UN and International Court of Justice?
a) Sri Lanka, India,
Thailand, Nepal must join hands with China, Russia, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos,
and several other countries that have unreservedly given their unqualified
support to Myanmar at the UN.
b) It is open to any
country to intervene at the International Court of Justice in the capacity of
an amicus curiae. What is ‘amicus curiae’? Latin ‘for friend of the court’. In
other words, amicus curiae is an instrument for the benefit of the court, that assists
it in some manner. Black’s Law Dictionary
defines amicus curiae as ‘[a] person who is not a
party to a lawsuit but who petitions the court or is requested by the court to
file a brief in the action because that person has a strong interest in the
subject matter.’ It is within the power of the ICJ to accept Amicus Curiae briefs
from countries that have a strong interest in the proceedings and its outcome.
OIC is in the picture via Gambia. The
absence of the equivalent of an OIC in the Buddhist world such as a summit
level League of Buddhist Nations, is worrisome.
While European Christian heritage
nations are protected heavily by the European Union (EU) and NATO, and Islamic
countries have the powerful 57 member OIC to take up their cause at the drop of
a hat, Buddhist countries lack an international Buddhist organization with
clout to adequately defend them at a time of crisis.
Between Turkey and Indonesia,
there are only four non – Muslim countries, namely the pre-dominantly Hindu
India, and three predominantly Buddhist countries, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand.
They all face threats to their
survival from armed violence and demographic change.
UNP General Secretary Akila Viraj Kariyawasam says that former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe will contest the forthcoming General Election in the capacity of the party leader.
He was addressing a media conference held at UNP Headquarters Sirikotha this morning.
