{"id":99509,"date":"2020-03-01T17:53:46","date_gmt":"2020-03-02T00:53:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=99509"},"modified":"2020-03-01T17:53:46","modified_gmt":"2020-03-02T00:53:46","slug":"provocative-abuse-of-american-power","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2020\/03\/01\/provocative-abuse-of-american-power\/","title":{"rendered":"Provocative abuse of American power"},"content":{"rendered":"

H. L. D. MAHINDAPALA<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n
\"\"\/<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

With\nincontrovertible evidence gleaned from unimpeachable international sources Daya\nGamage, by far the most knowledgeable analyst of America\u2019s role in Sri Lanka \u2013\nhe once worked in the American Embassy acquiring detailed insights into the\noperations of the mission \u2013 has revealed that the decision to place a travel\nban on Lt. Gen. Shavendra Silva originated from the Embassy in Colombo though\nthe American Ambassador Alaina B. Teplitz, playing the role of Pontius Pilate,\npretended at the meeting with the Foreign Minister, Dinesh Gunawardena, that\nthe decision came down from Washington. Simultaneously he revealed, quoting\ninternal documents of the State Department, that the American Embassy in\nColombo is run by Americans who are guided by their introverted biases that\nreject the ground realities. It is the innate inability of the American\ndiplomats to grasp the internal dynamics of the countries to which they are\nposted that turns them into misguided missiles. American diplomats who\narrogantly assume that they know the right prescription to cure the ills of the\nworld have failed, time and again, leaving the world in a twisted mess that was\nnot there when they began their provocative and counter-productive\ninterventions. Example: Iran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, there are times when they are pushed to defend the\nmiscalculated politics of their leaders like planting the American embassy in\nJerusalem. But more often they rush blindly, on their own initiatives, into\nplaces where angels fear to tread. They have a penchant for creating problems\nwhere none existed. The latest is the travel restrictions placed on Lt. Gen.\nShavendra Silva. This decision does not reflect her impressive academic and\nprofessional credentials. It looks more like an act of an irrational and\nvindictive Kali Amma \u2013 the Hindu goddess of death and doomsday. It is a\nprovocative act that will not serve Lanka-American relations, peace or human\nrights. Her theoretical knowledge acquired from academia and her hands-on\nexperience derived from serving in war-torn zones in Asia (she also served in\nKabul) should have informed her to be more cautious.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The massive backlash against her counter-productive decision\nshould teach her in the future to make mature and balanced decisions taking\ninto consideration not only the American practices of ending its horrendous\nwars but also the inevitable exigencies of the battlefield. If, for instance,\nin her moral conscience she had remembered the images of the Nobel Peace prize\nwinning President Barak Obama watching with anxious intensity his Navy Seals\nraiding the den of Osama Bin Laden and massacring the millionaire terrorist,\nhis wife and his son she would never have had the arrogance to pass her\nprovocative judgment on Gen. Silva. If she had bothered to remember how the\nAmericans hunted the driver of Osama Bin Laden and tortured him at Guantanamo\nBay while giving permanent residency to Prabhakaran\u2019s lawyer, Rudrakumaran, who\nwas a partner in the crimes of the Tamil terrorist leader, she would have had\nsecond thoughts about rushing to impose a travel ban.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Would Teplitz ever issue a visa to Osama bin Laden\u2019s lawyer from\nKabul? So on what moral basis does America permit Rudrakumaran to live in\nAmerica and, in the same breath, refuse to give even a visa to Gen. Silva? But\nthen the chicken memories of insensitive and half-baked American diplomats are\ngeared to serve only their perverse objectives of creating unnecessary trouble\nwhere none exists. Diplomats are supposed to pour oil over troubled waters not\nto set fire.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Above all, any judgment on the conduct of the war must take into\nconsideration the objectives achieved by ending the war. Since human rights\nhave become the prime concern of the political moralists it is only fair to\nassess the conduct of Gen. Silva\u2019s offensive in terms of how it related to\nhuman rights. The first question that has to be asked is: Did his offensive\nwhich ended the war put an end to the violations of human rights perpetuated by\nthe war? If so on what side should morality fall? In this instance the ends\njustify the means because there isn\u2019t a higher objective in a battlefield than\nsaving human lives and human rights. By ending the war swiftly without letting\nit drag on Gen. Silva did serve human rights. His successful strategy to end\nthe war also ended the perpetuation of the violations of human rights that had\nplagued the nation for 33 years (between 1976 when the Tamil leadership\ndeclared war in Vadukoddai and 2009).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Teplitz\u2019s judgment to selectively target Gen. Silva indicates\nthat she has brushed aside the higher moral value of saving and serving human\nrights by ending a needless war that would have only perpetuated the violations\nof human rights. She has gone overboard to impose her arbitrary judgment which\nwill neither serve human rights nor set an example to other generals engaged in\nbattles to end fascism and terrorism. There are limits to compliance with human\nrights in the battlefield. It should not tie the hands of those fighting to\nsave human rights from the enemies of human rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However desirable and moral it may be to observe the decent\nrules of engagement in the battlefield the generals will be pushed at times,\nparticularly when facing fascist terrorists, to the ends of their wits to be\nwithin the prescribed norms. If they happen to violate the norms within\ntolerable limits then they should not be condemned if they had achieved the\nhigher goal of ending the violations of human rights by ending the war.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Her knowledge of the history of wars should have also informed\nher that the best means of ending violations of human rights in conflict zones\nis by ending wars. Appeasing an intransigent and ruthless enemy, or postponing\nthe inevitable end of eliminating the blood-thirsty enemy is not an acceptable\nmoral or viable answer. Those hoping to save victims of violence cannot depend\non moral theories to eradicate violators of human rights. It has never worked.\nFor instance, she should know, with all her academic background, that World War\nII was not ended by observing the highest principles of human rights but by\nbombing the hell out of Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden in Germany. The\nultimate command responsibility was with Truman and Churchill. Which one of\nthem was tried in Nuremberg for war crimes?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sri Lankan generals fighting the world\u2019s deadliest\nterrorist\u201d were faced with a greater moral dilemma: How do you end the war in\nits last stages and save human lives and human rights in a battlefield where\nthe intransigent and ruthless enemy was waging a war behind a human shield? The\nimmorality of throwing his own people as cannon fodder to stave off an\nadvancing force is not only cowardly but inhuman. This is the ultimate dignity\ngiven by the Tamil hero to the Tamil people. He was forcing his people to fight\nhis futile war hoping to gain military and propaganda advantages. He was a\nbarbaric coward who was hoping to live by sacrificing the lives of other Tamil\npeople. In the battlefield how was any general to know the difference between\nTamil Tiger terrorists and the innocent Tamil victims forced to stand as a\nhuman shield?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue before the Sri Lankan generals was simple: It was\neither to end the war with the minimum of casualties which is what happened\naccording to the statistical evidence available at the British Foreign office.\nOr to stop waging war altogether hoping that it would end violations of human\nrights by Prabhakaran, the \u201dpathological killer\u201d (James Jupp, ANU, Australia,)\nwho had killed more Tamils than all the others put together, as stated by Tamil\nleaders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This was never going to happen because Prabhakaran could survive\nonly as a leader of war and not as a democratic leader of peace. Faced with\ndwindling cadres in his own ranks, his last defence line was to create a human\nshield for his survival. Besides, throwing human shields to the frontline was a\ndeliberate tactic used to mobilise international opinion against the Sri Lankan\ngovernment to stop the war and save Prabhakaran. Using immoral tactics to\ncreate moral dilemmas for policy-makers should be rejected as a justifiable moral\nbase for passing judgment on the victims of the Machiavellian tactics. The\njustifiable sympathy should go to the victims of the immoral tactics that led\nto the violations of human rights and not to the criminal originators who\ndeliberately planned the violations of human rights to gain political mileage\nout of their tactics. To pass judgment on the victims of immoral tacticians is\nto exonerate and justify the criminals who deliberately planned strategies to\ncause violations of human rights. Any moral law should recognise first the\nresponsibility of those who consciously abandon the non-violent democratic\nmainstream and chooses the violent path to achieve political goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

History is not without alternatives. Non-violent paths are\nalways open for those who have the courage to take that path. The Tamil\nleadership chose the violent path. It was the Tamil leadership that declared\nwar against the rest of the nation in their notorious Vadukoddai Resolution of\n1976. It was they who mobilised the local and global forces to wage their war.\nIt was they who financed the war from Western bases.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was they who weaponised local politics to justify their\nVadukoddai violence. It was they who urged the Tamil youth to take up arms\nagainst the Sinhala state\u201d. It was they who justified the forcible recruitment\nof under aged Tamil children to fight their futile war. It was the Tamil\nleadership that rejected national and international peace deals that could have\nended violence and human rights violations much earlier than 2009. It was the\nTamil leadership that broke all international agreements, including the UN\nagreement not to recruit children and accept peace deals like the Indo-Sri\nLanka Agreement. It was the Tamil leadership that threw a human shield to\nprolong and perpetuate violence and violations of human rights. The first\nvictim of the declaration of war in the Vadukoddai Resolution was human rights.\nThe criminal history of the Tamil elite to suppress and deny their own people\neven the right to walk in God-given daylight was not prevalent either in the\nBible belt of America or in S. Africa. She puts a ban on the general who put an\nend to all these crimes with his military strategies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If any violations took place it was not as a result of a\ndeliberate policy of the state or the forces to target civilians. However, if\nshe was finicky about the minutest violations of human rights why has she not\ntaken up the issue of the IPKF forces that rushed into the Jaffna Teaching\nHospital and massacred doctors, nurses, patients and even children? Before\nrushing hastily to pass judgment on those who fought to end this evil war and\nrestore human rights, justice and peace it was her moral and professional duty\nto have acquainted herself with a sufficient degree of the ground realities. Her\nunfair and arbitrary judgment passed on Gen. Silva reveals only her incapacity\nto balance the hard facts with the logic that leads to a credible and fair\nmorality. If she knew about these historical factors would she have passed\njudgment on those who ended the violations of human rights by ending the war?\nHer first priority should have been to reward those who saved lives by ending\nthe perpetuation of the violations of human rights. Instead she sits like\nMadame Defarge knitting her yarns about human rights while those who were\noperating the guillotine were exonerated by her silent patronage. It was easy\nfor her to pontificate and pass judgment. But the people of Sri Lanka \u2013\nincluding the Tamils \u2013 were not saved by American pontificators. They were\nsaved by the generals who fought, risking their lives, to restore peace,\nliberty, democracy and human rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Most of all, if she is the moralist that she pretends to be why\ndoes she selectively turn a blind eye to the moral precedents set by her\nrevered leaders who had ended their wars by using excessive force knowing that\nthe enemies (Germans and Japanese) were beaten to their knees? Why does she\nembrace the tactic of annihilating the enemy at any cost as moral when it is\nused by her leaders and in the same breath reject it as immoral when it is used\nby Sri Lanka generals with the minimum of force?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is her valid argument to impose her holier-than-thou\nmorality to punish Sri Lankan generals who had saved liberty, dignity and human\nrights of the Tamils kept under the boots of a Tamil tyrannical fascist? In no\nway could the Sri Lankan forces \/ government prevented the violations of human\nrights as long as Prabhakaran lived to fight another day. In punishing Gen.\nSilva she is guilty of endorsing the brutal practices of Prabhakaran to\nperpetuate his inhuman and irrational war that did not take the Tamil people\ninto depths of despair and suffering. If Teplitz has a better moral way of\nsaving human rights than the strategy adopted by Gen. Silva she should first\nstate that before condemning him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There were two forces battling for supremacy for 33 years in Sri\nLanka. I unhesitatingly back the Sri Lankan forces, with some remorse of\ncourse, because they served the higher morality of liberating the Tamils from\nthe tyranny of a Tamil megalomaniac who had killed more Tamils than all the\nother forces put together, as stated by Tamil leaders. It was also a great\nbattle between a democracy and a fascist tyranny. With all its imperfections\nSri Lanka fought Tamil fascism within a democratic framework, even providing\nprotection to the most slavish agents of Prabhakaran in the TNA. As opposed to\nthis Teplitz should consider how her nation treated the domiciled Japanese as\nenemies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She must be quite au fait with the concentration camps erected\nto imprison innocent Japanese civilians in World War II because Tojo had bombed\nthe American base in Pearl Harbour. The American–Japanese were imprisoned\nsimply because they were Japanese and not because they were guilty of\ncomplicity with the Japanese government. Shouldn\u2019t Teplitz place the GOSL on\nthe highest moral plane because they did not follow the unjust and inhumane\nexample of incarcerating the Tamils in concentration camps in times of war?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last but not the least, Teplitz should answer one question: If\nin the name of human rights Gen. Silva ceased his operations and allowed\nPrabhakaran to pursue his violent politics what would have been the fate of\nhuman rights? The chances are that she would come back and blame the GOSL for\nnot making concessions to Prabhakaran to end the war. In other words, she would\nhave preferred Prabhakaran to run his fascist Eelam the way he wanted in the\nname of human rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Does she believe that human rights would be served in the last\nresort by the rule of Prabhakaran or by victories of Sri Lankan generals? She\nhas enough sense to know that it is the victories of the Sri Lankan generals\nthat had saved and served human rights at its optimum level. If so why has she\nrushed to impose travel bans on Gen. Silva?\n\nAmerica has produced\nseveral female geniuses. Among them are my favourites Emily Dickinson, Eleanor\nRoosevelt and the Nobel laureate Toni Morrison\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

H. L. D. MAHINDAPALA With incontrovertible evidence gleaned from unimpeachable international sources Daya Gamage, by far the most knowledgeable analyst of America\u2019s role in Sri Lanka \u2013 he once worked in the American Embassy acquiring detailed insights into the operations of the mission \u2013 has revealed that the decision to place a travel ban on […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-99509","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-h-l-d-mahindapala"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99509","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=99509"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99509\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=99509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=99509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=99509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}