{"id":115151,"date":"2021-06-12T16:40:17","date_gmt":"2021-06-12T23:40:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=115151"},"modified":"2021-06-12T16:41:30","modified_gmt":"2021-06-12T23:41:30","slug":"erasing-the-eelam-victory-part-18d-pt-4d","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/06\/12\/erasing-the-eelam-victory-part-18d-pt-4d\/","title":{"rendered":"ERASING THE EELAM VICTORY Part 18D Pt 4D"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

The Darusman Report (2011) which was commissioned by the UN Secretary-General pointed out that that there was a need for the UN to review its actions in the Eelam War IV. Clearly, it was felt that the UN had failed in its task of manipulating the Eelam war. Sri Lanka had won the Eelam war. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

UN Secretary-General then established an Internal Review Panel under Charles Petrie, to review UN actions in Sri Lanka during the final stages of the war in Sri Lanka and after. The Petrie report stated that from 2003 to 2007, the UN had wanted to establish a human rights operation in Sri Lanka, but failed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2007 and 2008, the UN Department of\nPolitical Affairs (DPA) in New York, considered various tactics in Sri Lanka, which\nincluded a political solution to the conflict, a special envoy, establishing a\nhuman rights field presence and ensuring accountability for past human rights\nabuses and violations of international humanitarian law. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Out of these, UN  decided  in 2007, to focus on high-level visits by\nsenior UNHQ officials who could present UN concerns and suggestions to the\ngovernment .In 2007 alone Sri Lanka was visited by  * USG-Humanitarian Affairs , *Head of the\nOffice for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs  *the Under Secretary-General\n(USG)-Humanitarian Affairs, *Head of the Office of the High Commissioner for\nHuman Rights  and *the Representative of\nthe Secretary-General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons\n(RSG-IDPs). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

USG-Humanitarian Affairs, conducted more\nvisits to Sri Lanka than any other official, the Petrie Report   said.  However, the Government rejected most of the\nproposed initiatives, including the appeal by the UN for a field operation,  which meant\na sort of peacekeeping mission. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UN\u2019s relationships with the Government\nwere difficult, said Petrie Report, due to the Government stratagem of UN\nintimidation.\u201d  Government of Sri Lanka had\nused visas to control UN staff critical of the government. The Government\ndeclared several Resident Coordinators persona non grata, or made them\nunderstand that their visas were at risk of being withdrawn, while also\nrejecting proposed replacements with previous experience in crisis\nsituations.  The Government refused to\ngive them visas when UN tried to send in more staff to deal with the\nhumanitarian aspect of the War, continued Petrie Report. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2007 the Government formally launched its\nmilitary campaign in the Wanni against the last remaining area under LTTE\ncontrol. Over the following 18 months, the fighting gradually intensified and\nin September 2008, as the conflict entered its final stages, the Government\nofficially informed the UN it could no longer guarantee the safety of staff in\nthe Wanni. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Within\nthree weeks, the UN withdrew all international staff, effectively ending UN\nassistance operations from within the Wanni. The UN also tried to withdraw its\nentire national staff, but the LTTE prevented staff dependents from leaving,\nand many national staff consequently chose to remain behind. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Petrie report also looked at developments\nat the apex of the UN system. By 2007, UN was discussing Sri Lanka at its\nHeadquarters in New York. At UNHQ Sri Lanka was on the agenda not just of the\nPolicy Committee but also of the Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs\n(ECHA), and an Inter-Agency Working Group on Sri Lanka (IAWG-SL), said Petrie\nReport. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But Sri Lanka was never formally considered by\nMember States at the UN, whether at the Security Council, the Human Rights\nCouncil, or the General Assembly, the report said. From late 2008, a small\ngroup of non-permanent members of the Security Council had become deeply\nconcerned by events and by early February 2009 wished the Security Council to\nformally consider the situation in Sri Lanka. However, they did not have sufficient\nsupport within the Security Council for this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri Lanka was discussed in \u2018informal\ninteractive dialogue\u2019 at the Security Council, but this had no formal status,\nled to no outcomes and left no formal minutes of its deliberations. The Sri\nLankan ambassador to the UN participated in the meetings, providing the\nGovernment\u2019s version of events and potentially influencing discussions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Foreign Ministers from two member countries of\nthe Security Council went to Sri Lanka in late April 2009.  On 12th<\/sup> May, 2009 they called for\nSri Lanka to be placed on the Security Council\u2019s agenda. But this came too late\nto change the course of events, said Petrie Report. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Above all, UN action in Sri Lanka was not\nsupported by Member states, said Petrie Report. In the absence of clear Security Council\nbacking, the UN\u2019s actions lacked adequate purpose and direction. Member States\nfailed to provide the Secretariat and UN Country Team in Colombo with the\nnecessary support. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Petrie report said that the UN office in\nColombo had insufficient political expertise and experience in armed conflicts,\nhuman rights and humanitarian law issues to deal with the extraordinary\nchallenge\u201d that Sri Lanka presented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A UN staffer had told Rajiva\nWijesinha that\nthe UN had \u2018got this wrong.\u2019 Most of the UN staff had worked in countries with\nno established government and no regular provision of basic social services.  They did not know how to negotiate with a\nstrong government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UN representation in Sri Lanka was too\nweak to be effective, said Petrie Report. The UN office in Sri Lanka was headed\nby Resident Coordinator who reported to the Secretary-General through the UN\nDevelopment Programme (UNDP).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Resident Coordinator   was\nsupported by a Human Rights Adviser who provided a link to OHCHR, a\nReconciliation and Development Adviser who provided a link to DPA, a\ncommunications adviser who was also a spokesperson, and a gender adviser.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 As the\nEelam issue escalated a Crisis Management Group was established with Resident\nCoordinator,   the country heads of\nUNICEF, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the World Food Programme\n(WFP), and the UN Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and UN office for the\nCoordination of Humanitarian affairs, (OCHA). The group\u2019s initial focus was on\nthe logistical and operational aspects of UN action in the war area. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The events in Sri Lanka highlight the urgent\nneed for the UN to update its strategy for engagement with Member States in\nsituations where civilian populations caught up in the midst of armed conflicts\nare not protected in accordance with international human rights and\nhumanitarian law, said Petrie Report. The International Resource Panel of the\nUN found a systemic failure\u201d in the UN response during the final months of Sri\nLanka\u2019s conflict, evoking comparisons to UN failures in Rwanda in 1996 and\nSrebrenica in 1995, said Petrie Report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The report was presented to the\nSecretary General in November 2012, and led to a new policy within the UN\ncalled Rights-up-Front. In\n2013, in direct response to the Petrie Report, the Secretary-General launched\nthe Human Rights Up Front initiative. He issued a Human Rights Up Front\nDetailed Action Plan (updated March 2014). This called on the UN system to play\na strong role to prevent human rights crises. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There has been a new development in the role\nof the UN Resident Coordinator, observed Leelananda de Silva writing in October\n2019. For the past 50 years or so, the UNDP Resident Representative has also\nbeen the UN Resident Coordinator. It was an office involved with development\u201d.\nThe UNDP funded the post of UN Resident Coordinator in all developing countries\nwhere they were present. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A few months ago, the UN Secretary General\ndelinked the role of the UN Resident Coordinators from the UNDP and brought it\nunder Secretary General. The office of Secretary General of the UN is a\npolitical one. By\nchanging the role of the RC, the Secretary General has now a largely political\nrepresentative in Colombo. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri\nLanka needs to be more aware of this changed role of the UN Resident\nCoordinator. What does this official do? And what kinds of reports does this\nofficial send to the Secretary General? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\nunderstand that recently there was a request from the UN Human Rights office in\nGeneva, to appoint a representative in Colombo, and that was turned down by the\nGovernment. Now with this appointment, the UN has got a political office on the\nground here. The government should be aware of his precise role in this country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leelananda\nalso looked at protocol. UN personnel in Colombo are expected to meet\ngovernment officials at an appropriate level. In the 1970s,\nwhen I was Director of Economic Affairs in the Planning Ministry, I met the UN\nResident Coordinator and the UN Resident Representative in my office from time\nto time. The RC hardly met the Permanent Secretary or a Minister.  The\nPrime Minister they never met unless on some ceremonial occasion. In New York\nor Geneva, High level UN officers   meet our\nAmbassador. They do not meet first or second secretaries of our Embassy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now,\nthe practice has changed. Recently I saw some photographs of the UNDP Resident\nRepresentative (not the UN Resident Coordinator) meeting the President and the\nPrime Minister. This UNDP representative is a mid-level official of the UN. He\ndoes not have official access to President and the Prime Minister. This means\nthat   High level UN officers do not need\nto seek an appointment with Head of state, the junior\nofficials can attend to the matter for them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\nis another problem when protocol is discarded, said Leelananda. When UN\nofficials in Colombo can conduct their business at the ministerial level, why\nshould they bother with officials? They can go above their heads. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leelananda   also looked at UN aid.  Initially, there was a certain amount of\ndevelopment aid, especially in the form of technical assistance from UN bodies.\nNow that has ceased, as Sri Lanka is no longer eligible for concessional\nassistance.\n<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

UNDP\noffices are now channeling aid from various bilateral donors. The aid funds\ncome from bilateral donors to UN bodies and these UN bodies fund projects in\nSri Lanka. These UN bodies have to report to these bilateral donors. In fact,\ntheir very existence in a country now depends on bilateral funding of projects.\nThese UN bodies are no longer independent aid donors, as they used to be,\nwarned Leelananda. (Continued)\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS The Darusman Report (2011) which was commissioned by the UN Secretary-General pointed out that that there was a need for the UN to review its actions in the Eelam War IV. Clearly, it was felt that the UN had failed in its task of manipulating the Eelam war. Sri Lanka had won the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-115151","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-kamalika-pieris"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115151","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=115151"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/115151\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=115151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=115151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=115151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}