CLASSIFIED | POLITICS | TERRORISM | OPINION | VIEWS





 .
 .

 .
 .
.
 

Of Patriots, Heroics, Subversions of a nation

By Dimuth Gunawardena

"When information flows freely, people are equipped with tools to take control of their lives"……Ban Ki Moon - 2nd May 2008 (Press Freedom day)

My attention was caught by the comment made to the press by the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for "Democracy", "Human Rights", and Labour Erica Barks-Ruggles at the conclusion of her recent visit to Sri Lanka.

Quote….
I have heard about the challenges that they face especially those in the media. There is a lot of concern about personal security. At the same time I am impressed by the courage shown not only by the press corps here, which is numerous and vocal, but also of civil society. There are many people among them who are committed to Sri Lanka's future. They are true patriots but they are facing many challenges.
……..Unquote

Depicting "Civil Society" with INGO's/NGO's operating in Sri Lanka and "patriotism" with "people for whose services are paid for...", Erica Barks-Ruggles's comments did open champagne bottles for these INGOs/NGOs whose livelihoods depend on following instructions by their foreign masters and vilifying Sri Lanka, the Government and its armed forces. Not a hum against the LTTE

Of late the INGOs/NGOs have being described as "traitors", "unpatriotic tiger lovers" "separatists" - whether these "tags" warranty any credit is what I propose to explore by forwarding to the readers a deeper look into the real agendas of these "neo-imperialist agents of the west". It is their broader agendas that require greater attention that the atrocities carried out by the LTTE throughout the past 30 years and it is these agendas that are likely to seal the real fate of Sri Lanka unless exposed.

It is no exaggeration and none can deny the plush lifestyles that these supra "peace building" experts lead. The SUVs, the luxury homes, 5 star seminars, countless foreign trips, unchallenged emoluments and salaries all generate from kind hearts of people who are under the impression that they are giving to a "cause". Little do they know that over 60% of the "charity money" go for these "administrative" costs and barely 40% are used for any real "peace building" effort - and they audaciously accuse Governments!

Behind the slogans like "human rights" "media freedom" "peace" there exists a bigger industry that thrives using the very terminology that marks their existence and permits them to operate with impunity in the "south" nations (those bullied into submission). It takes little effort to highlight "grave abuses committed by Governments" internationally and nations that are financially weak to counter the hyped up allegations and INGOs/NGOs ("not Government") elevated to "super heroes to civil society" by western media to launch their role of "transformations" based on the "agendas that their financiers aim to achieve" in various "geographical land masses of the world".

The best example was the anti-Sri Lankan lobby to which INGO'S/NGO's located in Sri Lanka joined in a bid to nullify Sri Lanka's re-election to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Celebrate they did when the news of Sri Lanka's omission was received. A party hosted by Mr Guy Rhodh of Soldar on 23rd May at his Colombo residence included Mr Phillip Atkins from Norwegian People's Aid, staff of ASB, Mr Mathew Todd of Swiss Labour Assistance (SLA)….(with a more interesting list of guests) The hearty toast was to congratulate all those who worked to ensure Sri Lanka was denied a seat on the UNHRC Council. These must be those "true patriots" that Erica Barks-Ruggles must have referred to!

We wonder who are the masters of INGOs/NGOS like Prayathna, National Peace Council, Sarvodaya and the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) who stand accused by the public of "singing for their supper" to justify acts of terrorism. But, their predicament has to be empathized - if they fail to "sing" someone else is likely to take their place. There is a steady line of "parasites" to take up the mantle and there is no room for any outside infiltration. Funds come by organisations such as USAID through Academy of Education Development (AED) and other such fronts disbursing millions of Rupees - on the premise that their desires are fulfilled.

Presently, one observes a massive recruitment drive by NGOs island wide. Their aim obviously is to establish a significant number of offices backed by their people to drive any "ideological" program when required. This does immediately raise the issue of internal security of the nation.

Sri Lanka is not the only victim of INGO/NGO hidden agendas.

The case of Kosovo (former Yugoslavia) and its separation illustrates INGO/NGO activity through Norway, USA and NATO states. Its deeper significance for Sri Lanka vis a vis the R2P agenda under the auspices of the World Federalist Movement, the Canadian Government (US satellite state) and even the UN should be an eye-opener The R2P agenda initiated and funded by Canada and Human Rights INGOs/NGOs is being pushed presently into reality with the UN starting off open sessions at its headquarters from 12 May 2008 on strategies to make R2P from concept to reality within the UN system.

Sri Lanka's experience with foreign intervention goes back to colonial times followed by the entry of the Indian Peace Keeping Force that left many a Tamil woman raped, pregnant and their parents in shock (refer Rajini Thiranagama of UTHR). An army that was to maintain peace eventually had to be asked to leave before creating a replica of Vietnam by the US army.

The R2P military intervention was exactly what the IPKF sought to do in Sri Lanka - as a foreign force they operated with a certain degree of impunity much like the piled up cases of rape, pornography, smuggling, arming terrorists etc being piled against UN peace keepers in all of the 18 missions globally.

Evidently, the "Geopolitical" importance becomes a catalyst to the "interests" of Western powers (the unseen hands) on behalf of whom the INGOs/NGOs as agents ensure their "agendas" are fulfilled.

Yugoslavia - the truth

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) operated under the auspices of NATO - its Chairman was Knut Volleback, Norway's Foreign Affairs Minister. Yugoslavia was asked to accept OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission in 1998 to monitor a "ceasefire" between the Yugoslav army and the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army-an Albanian terrorist group) or face being bombed. The OSCE comprised of mostly Americans and it was easy to accuse the Yugoslav army of killing civilians in Racak - allegations to be proved false since the massacres were done by KLA on instructions of the CIA. It was however, enough reason for NATO troops to bomb Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999 using the Racak massacre as an excuse. One can imagine how other such events for intervention can be staged and INGOs/NGOs are easy tools to set the foundations.

Volleback and Madeleine Albright (former US Secretary of State) worked closely and her heartlessness is supported by her reply that the deaths of 50,000 Iraqi children (as a result of US sanctions) were "worth it".

There is some confusion in Yugoslavia crisis. How was the KLA receiving so much international support if the Yugoslav army was defending its civilians? Of course we must note that the KLA is also guilty of financing itself through trafficking heroin and human organs besides a link to Al Qaeda. The KLA is also guilty of victimizing and killings and the Yugoslav army was attempting to push them out of Kosovo. Yet, why were NATO troops impatient to descend upon Yugoslavia - obviously the OSCE "observers" from Washington had their "instructions" to

1) Unify and prepare the KLA terrorists as an adversary to the Yugoslav army who would function on the ground while NATO takes on the air attacks (since the KLA was controlling 40% of Kosovo).

2) Engineer the Racak massacre as an excuse for the presence of NATO in Yugoslavia and was it a surprise when Toronto Star in its news report titled their story as " The hoax that started a War".. Even Shakespeare could not have written a better play!

The case of Kosovo showcases how countries like Norway (certainly not the impartial peace facilitator) being a NATO member operates hand in glove with the services of INGO's/NGO's.

The problems of Kosovo which is part of Serbia should have been solved internally. No country, or force has a right to impose a settlement or sponsor a terrorist movement in that country - no state has a right to coerce authorities to sign an agreement by threatening to bomb to the ground…. There are many other irregularities that occurred and too many to mention individually but what Volleback did echoes similar sinister designs that took place during Eric Solheims role in Sri Lanka - another Norwegian too.

Norway's role in international peace takes us through its "peace roles' in Palestine/Israel, Serbia/Kosovo and Sri Lanka and we can clearly see how their diplomats operate with collaborations of the US State Department.

To ask the Norwegians themselves, who all but confessed the whole game in a recent Christian Science Monitor article [1],

Quote………
"You find Norwegians in the most unlikely places…Everywhere there is a crisis, there seems to be a Norwegian,' says Geir Lundestad, director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute…'The purest form of the Norwegian model is the foreign ministry working in symbiosis with one or more academic or non governmental humanitarian organizations,' (INGO's/NGO's) says Jan Egeland, the Norwegian diplomat who invented the model…As a small country with a small foreign service, Norway's global ambitions as a peacemaker have forced it to outsource its diplomacy to non governmental organizations, (INGO'S/NGO'S's) officials say. 'The ministry is quite limited when it comes to expertise in different parts of the world' explains Ms. [Mona] Juul, 'so we've been exploiting outside expertise. We have the money, they have the contacts.' "
…..Unquote

Anatomy of an evil empire

Returning to Erica Barks-Ruggles "patriots who are paid for their services" (INGO's/NGO's) and why they do what they do, it also warrants us to analyse the historical geopolitical perspective of American "policy" which has been one of aggression from the time of the Mexican- American war to the present scenarios that prevail. The historical fact of Global American aggression will expose how INGO's/NGO's form a vital link in the greater scheme of things. Meddling in other peoples business has been the business of people of Erica Barks-Ruggles and the cornerstone of American policy worldwide.

But, Americans like Erica Barks-Ruggles prefer to project their nation as acting upon "benevolence". Maxims like "human rights" "media freedom" "weapons of mass destruction" "terrorism" are great sources of

camouflage where it becomes cumbersome to prove or disapprove as reasons for invasions to take place. US policy can best be summed up by a secret document written by George Kennan to the head of the US State Dept soon after WW-II:

"We have about 50% of the world's wealth (not anymore) but only 6.3% of its population. ... In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity ... …..The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better."

Thus, idealistic slogans are preferred option to market "sinister designs" through the press to the world.

Spectrum of the world dominance

Pentagon's "Joint Vision 2020" defines "the defeat of any adversary or control of any situation across the full range of military operations." The United States seeks to maintain and expand its power over as much of the world as possible. As the Bush administration's "National Security Strategy of the United States" (NSS), published in September 2002, put it:

"Our military must ... dissuade future military competition; deter threats against U.S. interests, allies, and friends; and decisively defeat any adversary if deterrence fails. ... The United States will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia, as well as temporary access arrangements for the long-distance deployment of U.S. forces. ...

Essentially America's "freedom and democracy" must be defended and to fight terrorism of course though the document was not inspired by the events that occurred on 9/11. This document was a precursor to a document titled "Rebuilding America's Defences" (RAD) published in September 2003 by the Project for a New American Century, a conservative think tank whose members include Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and many others of the Bush administration. It is the blueprint for the Bush administration's defense policy - one of the ideas has been implemented in Iraq.

". ... Our strategy must now refocus on precluding the emergence of any potential future global competitor. ... In the Middle East and Southwest Asia, (I hope Indian policy makers have seen this part) our overall objective is to remain the predominant outside power in the region and preserve U.S. and Western access to the region's oil."

In short, the United States intends to bully and dominate the world by force and maintain its status-quo at all costs to the rest of humanity.

Mechanisms of Controlling the Empire

The term "Client States" traversed through the Roman Empire, Nazi Germany, World War 2 and Russian empire. The US has not only "client states" but also "satellite states, puppet government and vassal states. These "clients" are quintessentially controlled by a foreign state (in Sri Lanka's case it could be a country like India with whom USA now has very close strategic partnership) and made to become dependent on it for economic or military or political support for pure survival.

There are many ways to "control" - military intervention or R2P becomes a perfect option when the UN Security Council is unable to make a decision. Afghanistan, Iraq are perfect examples. Proxy Forces are those that appear as "Civil Society Groups" and INGOs/NGOs with their negative reporting, demonstrations and the arming of terrorist groups as was in the case of KLA and Pol Pot. Enforcer States - are those nations like India that agree to carry out any agendas if it meets their own strategic interest. Cour d'etats - or acts of sabotage such as the "Rendon Group". Foreign Aid - an effective tool for intimidation. Sanctions - an effective tool to make nations succumb to the will of the super powers. Here too we can see how EU is using the GSP+ as a threat to Sri Lana. Subverting elections - another means to destabilise using the media. CIA - RAW ....are we too ambitious to toy with the idea that recent missions of subversion, abduction, media assault....leading to civil unrest may have been the result of these intelligence services?

Examples of "Freedom of the press"

"Purchased Media" is a perfect tool for the INGO's/NGO's and easily helps to promote their overall game plan.. Hence Erica Barks-Ruggles statements and constant statements by the American Ambassador and State Dept. must be viewed through this prism.

For example how ""Free Media"" plays on our thought process.....

By the time the US invaded Iraq the "Free Media" had played their symphony so well that 42% of Americans believed that Iraq did 9-11 and the majority believed that Iraq's were supporting Al-Qaeda. Most Americans were fooled by the media into thinking Iraq was a direct threat to them, even though its military wasn't even capable of reaching the USA. The United States is actually one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the world. Its goal is not to stop terrorism; "terrorism" is only a pretext to justify American aggression worldwide.

Today certain segments of Sri Lankan media too are playing this role in cohort with INGOs/NGOs who have systematically tarnished Sri Lanka's image through their heads appearing across BBC, AP, ABC, Reuters etc giving an ""Independent" political analysts" but end up depicting a nation in flames and a country in anarchy. Unauthenticated information is also used by other characters like John Holmes, Louis Arbour in their reporting to various world bodies.

Of late the INGOs/NGOs prefer to use mere numbers - civilian deaths to portray genocide, carnage etc as an obvious means to steer R2P ratification through UN Security Council.

US and their UN" - the guardian of human rights"

Having created the background scenario the US backed Cambodia's Khmer Rouge into power in 1975 making the US directly responsible for the genocide that eventually took place by politically and financially helping the Pol Pot regime. The financing is said to be in the range of $85million.

The Khmer Rouge was also backed in the UN through the US to enable the Pol Pot regime to return. However, the Khmer Rouge government ceased to exist in January 1979 following the invasion by the Vietnam army though Cambodia's UN seat was very much still Khmer Rouge. The genocide committed by Pot Pot was recorded in a 1979 UN Human Rights Commission report as being the "worst to have occurred anywhere in the world since Nazism". Yet, Pol Pot was never made to pay for his crimes - here lies the hypocrisy of US policy and the UN Human Rights Sub commission eventually had to drop its draft resolution on Cambodia in 1991. No more, the UN body decided, should member governments seek to "detect arrest, extradite or bring to trial those who have been responsible for crimes against humanity in Cambodia." No more are governments called upon to "prevent the return to government positions of those who were responsible for genocidal actions during the period 1975 to 1978." The western world such as EU countries supported USA on this resolution. This very same UN is pushing the R2P concept against its own member states like Sri Lanka.

The use of proxy forces is further illustrated in the US setting up of the Kampuchean Emergency Group (KEG) in the US embassy in Bangkok to fight against Cambodia. KEG's mission was to "monitor" distribution of Western humanitarian supplies sent to refuges camps in Thailand and that Khmer Rouge camps were fed. $12million worth of food were handed over to the Thai army by the World Food program in 1980 after US pressure - "20,000 to 40,000 Pol Pot guerrillas benefitted" by this handover claimed former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke and not anybody else. The aid to Khmer Rouge destabilized Cambodia for over a decade. This is the type of Humanitarian Aid these INGO's/NGO's like the UN talk about for Sri Lanka.

Recently we have heard calls by another US enforcer state the "EU" as well as the UN to allow INGOs/NGOs into LTTE areas. A step that would soon lead to dissemination of false information as was done in Kosovo (Rasack massacre) to further their R2P strategy for Sri Lanka and induct UN forces into Sri Lanka posing as peace keepers.

Can the UN that gave Pol Pot a seat, absolving them of "Crimes against Humanity" have any moral right to talk of R2P on any forum anywhere in the world together with rest of the INGO's and contract state "Canada"?

Perhaps one can excuse the "young ladies" like Louis Arbours', or the Erica Barks-Ruggles who may not have been born during this time hence the hypocrisy in their work but we certainly were, and we remember, and we know the UN staff and their sinister plans better…..

The US and the "US Client State"

"Some of you will think it bad manners for a person like me, officially entered in the Big Book of Modern Nations as an "Indian citizen," to come here and criticize the U.S. government. Speaking for myself, I'm no flag-waver, no patriot, and am fully aware that venality, brutality, and hypocrisy are imprinted on the leaden soul of every state. But when a country ceases to be merely a country and becomes an empire, then the scale of operations changes dramatically. So may I clarify that tonight I speak as a subject of the American Empire? I speak as a slave who presumes to criticize her king....."
~ Arundhati Roy
In March 2005 the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced US's decision to make "India a global power" - it also meant that US arms manufacturers could enter the lucrative Indian market and profit from the arms race they created for the region.

The US was never worried or cared little for India's own ambitions but together they posed a threat to the "Chinese Pearls". While the US is aware of India's limitations especially India's inability to foster military supremacy and dominancy the US was also aware how India could be used to deploy a rapid-reaction force to be in countries along the rim of the Indian Ocean neighbours like Sri Lanka up to Madagascar or it's own Andaman Islands. However, sophisticated material like fast long-range aircrafts with aerial refuelling capabilities as well as other such arsenal was needed- the US could meet this need. India was after all one of the few countries that had the means to engage in a prolonged military exercise which even the EU did not have.

Where the US cannot secure a "client state" it resorts to the support of separatist groups by financing and through diplomatic means using ethnic or religious or geographical differences.

Prof James Petras article titled "Separatism and Empire Building in the 21st Century" published in the "Sri Lanka Guardian"

QUOTE....

-any country in which the US cannot secure a stable client regime, it resorts to financing and promoting separatist organizations and leaders using ethnic, religious and regional pretexts..........

Washington only supports separatists in countries that refuse to submit to imperial domination and opposes separatists who resist the empire and its allies..........

and even extend it to the most rancid, reactionary, imperial sponsored 'separatist groups' with catastrophic results. Independent nations and their people, who oppose US-backed separatists, are bombed to oblivion and charged with 'war crimes'.......

After 'independence', the separatist regime grants territorial concessions and building sites for US military bases. Investment privileges are granted to the imperial patron, severely compromising 'national' sovereignty......

When cross national irredentist movements challenge neighbouring states which are also targets of the US empire builders, they serve as launching pads for US low intensity military assaults and Special Forces terrorist activities.................

Conclusion:
The major fallacy of seemingly progressive liberals and NGOs in their advocacy of 'autonomy', 'decentralization' and 'self-determination' is that these abstract concepts beg the fundamental concrete historical and substantive political question - to what classes, race, political blocs is power being transferred? For over a century in the US the banner of the racist right-wing Southern plantation owners ruling by force and terror over the majority of poor blacks was 'States Rights' - the supremacy of local law and order over the authority of the federal government and the national constitution. The fight between federal versus states rights was between a reactionary Southern oligarchy and a broader based progressive Northern urban coalition of workers and the middle class.

....UNQUOTE

The global perspective with an American eye

The US military does have limitations too. It certainly is not equipped to handle guerrilla resistance as evident in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The legacy of Vietnam and most recently their military effort in Iraq reveals excessive numbers of US casualties, increasing numbers of soldier suicides marking the highest in US military history. It then becomes a preferred option for the US to co-opt enforcer states like India to take actions on "their behalf":

Thus the R2P type intervention presently being espoused is not as feasible as those who christened it imagined. There is always the danger of aggravating an internal blood bath when locals resort to opposing foreign forces entering one's nation. Hence the need to analyse the regional dynamics of the picture as they arise

American defence

If there is an agenda for Sri Lanka, how could the USA realize its objective using satellite client states like India without committing US troops?

A superpower like the US desires to maintain its hegemony over potential adversaries. With the end of the Cold War Pentagon shut down almost 35% of its bases near these areas and shifted troops to small bases along the "arc of instability" - West and Central Asia. For minimal permanent facilities and limited permanent detachments the US would need Indian support - to link Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and Okinawa and Guam in the Pacific using India's strategic location. One then immediately realizes how better suited Sri Lanka is in view of its natural harbour in Trincomalee (now in Indian hands) Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Saudi Arabia are a few of Asia's alternatives for the US. Additionally, the Indian navy has been trained to fuel US ships and its port facilities have been provided to US forces engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has made sense to use Indian facilities for US training in view of its geographical landscape, ice-clad mountains, deserts etc. - Indian armed forces too have been used as peace keepers, humanitarian assistance providers, disaster relief operators etc.

India has even agreed to allow US troops to use bases in Sri Lanka. This meant the LTTE was to be pressurized by Washington to resume talks with the Sri Lankan Government which led to the now failed CFA. For mutual gains Sri Lanka becomes a scapegoat to both India and USA!

The new framework for US-Indo Defense Relationship started in June 2005. It mentions how the two would conduct joint combined exercises and exchanges to counter disaster situations and collaborate in multinational operations and "peace keeping". The agreement does not mention the UN at all - and was evident of US plans to use disasters and regional conflicts to introduce its troops and those of its allies in situations to which they earlier had no access. The July 18, 2005 joint statement between Bush and Manmohan Singh speaks of a new "US-India Disaster Relief Initiative that builds on the experience of the Tsunami core group" - this was how the US were able to introduce its troops and equipment into Indonesia's Aceh province and Sri Lanka, where 1500 marines and amphibious assault ships came in for " so called humanitarian purposes" and of late we recall the US naval ships that were quick to be placed round Myanmar following it's cyclone.

Blatant violation of international law

An aspect that Sri Lanka must seriously take note of is that the agreement between India and the US which mentions collaboration for "proliferation of weapons of mass destruction" -India being part of the US led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) - this is neither a treaty or an organization, but an informal coordination among a group of states, without binding into any terms or regulations, under the banner of preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). It discards the role of the UN and in essence calls upon participating states to arrest ("interdict") the transport of WMDs, delivery systems and related materials to or from states or others who may be proliferating them. "Delivery systems" may mean missiles and "related materials" is however vague and is likely to cover materials for manufacture of fertilizers which could be seized. During the Iraqi sanctions one would recall how it was used to prevent Iraq from importing graphite which was to be used in the manufacture of pencils under the excuse such graphite which may be used in the manufacture of weapons.

According to the agreement PSI participants can board and search any vessel in their waters or even in high seas and seize such cargoes - even aircrafts "reasonably suspected of carrying such cargoes" and what of their fate if the aircraft refused to land? - They would be shot down alleging to have cargoes of WMDs! This was exactly what occurred to Iraq and a farcical allegation of WMDs to justify the invasion of Iraq as Racak was used to invade Yugoslavia.

If and when the West were to intimidate and threaten the Sri Lankan government with a Naval Blockade under UN auspices with an American initiative it would always be with the blessing of New Delhi.

India as the linchpin of a proposed "Asian NATO"

The Indian public is totally oblivious to the course its country is taking and slowly being turned into a linchpin for the US and its sponsored military initiative for Asia. In 2003 US and Indian officials discussed a possibility of an "Asian NATO" alliance. NATO in Western Europe was originally fashioned to work against the Soviet Union and the "Asian NATO" alliance that US has in mind would be against both Russia (India's former traditional ally) and China. In his speech at the "Confederation of Indian Industry-World Economic Forum" conference in New Delhi, India's then foreign secretary Shyam Saran made a fairly explicit statement of the plans for an "Asian NATO."

With Indian Navy on a "Look East" program sending goodwill missions to Southeast Asia to Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Japan to build links with countries around China, their navy has familiarised themselves in the South China Seas as a potential theatre of war and developed naval blue water capabilities to operate in this possible theatre of conflict under their alliance with USA. India new naval bases and listening posts like Myanmar (both India and China), Mozambique, Madagascar, Mongolia and Air Force bases in Kazakhstan are the Indian reply to the Chinese pearls. It's launching pad in Andaman Island..etc.

In 2004 Japan made an offer for a "global partnership" with India to balance China's rising power in the region. The following year Indian and Japanese prime ministers met and reaffirmed the "global partnership" status - it was a partnership against proliferation of so called "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (WMD). It was all part of the grand alliance to meet the threat from China. The US efforts on China is likely to be long term which explains why Pentagon thinkers envision a new Cold War - Robert Kaplan in "How we would fight China" (Atlantic, June 2005)

Yet China's position cannot be undermined. The emergence of a new silk road is obviously shows how the world is identifying China and not the US as future growth markets for oil exports. India, South Korea and Malaysia are likely to be included in this list. 2025 forecasts reveal how China will import three times as much oil from the Gulf as the USA. The new Silk Road will certainly outshine the old Silk Road and its connections to Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Iraq.


What is in it for these Americans?

The proposed security system will deal with three international security threats for the USA - over ambitious China, containment of recently wealthy (from surging commodity prices) Russia and the spread of Taliban led Islamic extremism in Central Asia. Indian involvement would make it look indigenous and not cause political hiccups and US troops would not have to be deployed.

The regional implications

For the proposed security system to succeed requires India to emerge as a counterpoise to China which would of course follow with US backing to secure India's membership to the UN Security Council. However, with the US military being stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and signs of strain revealed through US economy one wonders how the US plans to make India into a "global power"? Would India jeopardise the US37billion trade between China and itself for this ambition?

It then makes sense for US to resort to fall back on imperialist tendencies and this explains the invasion of Iraq and how the hold on oil may solve a part of the US problems.

Russia is also under US and Indian surveillance - US (assisted by EU) sponsored "revolutions" in Georgia and Ukraine, supported separatists in Chechnya to create a network of US allies around Russia. The US is also pushing for a "security organization" in the region of the oil-rich Caspian Sea excluding Russia and China. The US National Security Strategy (September 2002) declared that the United States would not tolerate the emergence of a competitor, not only for global hegemony or even for regional hegemony in any part of the world.

Indian Manoeuvrings

India has taken great efforts to politically and economically keep a firm footing strategically in Sri Lanka's Northern and Eastern Provinces - [The NIOC tank farm and jetty, proposed IT park in Trincomaleee, Kanthale Sugar Mill, KKS Cement Plant, Muttur and Nilaweli, Pulmudai, Valachchnai area for power projects, mining of Thorium, Titanium, (Illmanite and Zircon) and the Mananar Basin Block] in response to Hambanthota port being developed by the Chinese. This occasions us to quote TULF leader Sambanthan's statement that India is not concerned about the Tamil people - only itself (India has got Trincomalee and the Tamil people have got nothing) But then what about the Sethusamuram project for the North yet in all likelihood it is bound to submerge Jaffna province eventually.

With India being identified as a "client state" of the West and signing military alliances, India is being bound to the world's most reactionary power and becomes a target of the anti-US forces thus exacerbating the terrorist element India presently faces internally.

It then begs India to rethink its strategic alliance with US and ask of itself whether India really needs US support to dominate the region. India is a power in itself in the Indian Ocean, as a member of SAARC it has ageless ties with its neighbours, there is the Non-Aligned Movement or G77 and let us also note the ties with Iran, Venezuela, Russia and of course China etc. would India really wish to severe ties with its neighbours and be considered a hostile nation to the region? India and Iran are to sign a massive gas pipeline through the two nations.

Accepting that India wants greater supremacy it would benefit India to develop closer ties with its neighbours instead of acting as a hostile nation - as suggested by Sri Lanka's Foreign Minister to work on joint exercises like naval patrols between Indian and Sri Lankan Navy to curb proxy networks in the region.

India's conflicting and ambiguous actions makes anyone doubt their real intentions. Just like the sudden arrival of the three stars to Sri Lanka during the third week of June 2008. Obviously, Indian politics vis-a-vis Sri Lanka has been jolted into action by internal forces - namely Tamil Nadu. Internal politics being converged and confused with international bilateral relations will send not only mixed messages but result in catastrophic repercussions as was seen by the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Appeasing terrorists has its limitations and certainly it is not something that can continue forever. India must realise in the face of terrorist threats themselves that the LTTE is a non-negotiable factor and the sooner it is eliminated as a force the better even for internal politics of India where the Tamil Nadu politicos will not be able to politically manipulate the Central Government and will have to look for another avenue to hold the Central Government's attention. All this while the Central Government of India has been held to "ransom" by the Tamil Nadu politicos like Vaiko and Karunanadhi more so due to the "United Progressive Alliance" (UPA) having to currently do a fine balancing act between the so called "Nuclear Deal" with USA and it's Left Parties, thus affecting any sound policy for India and Sri Lanka as well as the region. Looking at India's neighbourhood like the Maoist govt. in Nepal, Military junta in Myanmar, Pakistan...etc Sri Lanka affords the best opportunity for India to forge a genuine strategic partnership that addresses each other's interests and concerns.


Sri Lanka's Concerns

For Sri Lanka's part it may be prudent to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as observers joining in a string of nations such as Pakistan, Nepal and Iran where SCO is presently functioning as an alternate to the Asian-NATO as being envisaged by US and possibly India's alliance to it. Even though India too has observer status in SCO. In view if the current Republican lobby and the presidential candidate McCain call to set up a "League of Democracies" omitting China and Russia to justify international legitimacy for American foreign invasions like Iran, Myanmar...recognition of Kosovo...etc considerations which hold grave ramifications for Sri Lanka's future and it's strategic options comes into dramatic effect.

The possible victory of Barak Obama as the next US president in view of his pro-Israeli speech at the "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" (AIPC) indicates his capacity to change tune due to political pressures just like the. role played by the former ambassador to Sri Lanka and member of Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Teresita C. Schaffer in the Democratic campaign after the election and the reality of the full impact lobbing by other Democratic forces in the House of Congress such as Congressmen Brad Sherman, Frank Pallone, Rush Holt…etc. Considering these developing scenarios and our voting against Sri Lanka by this western block Sri Lanka too needs to seriously consider the strategic direction of its policy. Countries like Cuba are a fine example to those that formulate such policy.

Conclusion back at home

"Borders are scratched across the hearts of men, By strangers with a calm, judicial pen,
And when the borders bleed we watch with dread The lines of ink across the map turn red...."

~Marya Mannes, Subverse: Rhymes for Our Times, 1959


So let us at least now get honest here……,

 

Sri Lanka independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity is facing dangers primarily from the UN looking at the actions of UN staff like Ms. Radhika Coomarasamy (as proved by ICES case) and all other UN R2P agendas, in close connivance with the INGO's/NGO's illustrated by acts such as Ms. Bavani Fonseka of CPA who shouts about how Sri Lankans kill children in New York when the UN Security Council is in session with one eye at R2P or when Mr Jehan Perera who clears the name of the LTTE by saying they kill only because the army kills them or Ms. Nimalka Fernando beats at herself in the chest and shouts and screams at various circuses and roundabouts who knows not what she shouts about anyway, it all for the whims of the hidden hand of their paymaster operating silently with a far bigger picture unseen and..... .

If one were to carefully analyse the statements and actions of the UN by its staff under leadership of our very own Ms. Rahdhika Coomarasamy, Sri John Holmes, and Ms. Louis Arbour..etc. The acts of systematic sabotage by them of a member state like Sri Lanka is too numerous to mention.

When the international newswires pickup some gossip from a fancy cafe in Colombo or quote an "Independent Political Analyst" like Mr Jehan Perera or Mr Sunanda Deshapriya destroying the good name of the country in the eyes of the world we must be aware as to whom they work for, the unseen hand

Therefore to all we should say

Before vilifying the Country, the Government and its people's it would be prudent to have these INGO's/NGO's publicly present their audited statements and allow the Sri Lanka public to scrutinize their activities. They must address the ideological challenges thrown at them by the people of Sri Lanka and then pack up and leave a place where they are not welcome or needed (perhaps some country like Sieerra Leone might accept all but one).

Similarly that there has emerged a magnitude of forces who are now ready to expose the hidden hands that work for petty gains and profit. To the people of the country if the need arises.

Our politicians have a great responsibility by all the people of all nationalities of this country at this most crucial time in history not to play dirty and opportunistic politics while being on the pay roll of various foreign masters.

The world was not interested that the country's East had been rid of the terrorists and provincial elections held a few months later, the world actually does not give two hoots about our cost of living, our human and political rights, the abductions or disappearances, they will only use these to achieve their own strategic objectives using us

They for example a case of point being where they were more interested in the visit of one of our leaders who suddenly appeared in Europe to lobby for an extension of the GSP+ facility - yet there is information to say that prior to his departure he had sent a letter to the Commissioner for External Relations of the EU informing that his party has decided to support the country claim subject to the condition that the Government to amend the 1978 Constitution in order that the "International Covenant on Civil Political Rights" (ICCPR) be incorporated into the laws of Sri Lanka. Page: 3

If the GSP+ were to be removed, it would be interesting to note if one of the reasons was that the ICCPR had not been fully incorporated in the Constitution. This then immediately makes anyone wonder why this political leader should write to the EU official saying the his party is willing to support the Government in amending the constitution - the EU official needs not be informed of internal matters especially when the Supreme Court had ruled that "no domestic legislation is necessary to give effect to the ICCPR" -it begs the question what his real intentions. Who was really behind these moves we have to reluctantly ask? Were any INGO's/NGO's lobbying influenced this politician to put lives of thousands of poor peoples livelihoods at stake for their selfish agendas?

This clearly violates the sovereignty of the nation and of Sri Lanka's judiciary. Puts to ridicule the rights of our people and panders to some foreign organisation meddling in our land. Generations will have to pay for these follies of short term power hungry politicians. Perhaps part of that grand R2P plan being worked out by various anti Sri Lankan forces of the west.

This same politician made some amazing statements in India about "Sri Lanka Loosing the war on terror" makes one wonder at whose prompting he did that? Who is manipulating whom? Whose elections these politicians are really interested in?

While we must no doubt strengthen the judicial processes, and other mechanisms that guarantee our freedoms and our political rights, ensure the rights of all our citizens, strengthen the democratic institutions of our country, ensuring the freedom of our press, that does not mean we have to go crying to the "white man" as some of the politicians are doing now for us to do so, it is disgraceful and they in turn only seek to exploit our divisions for their advantage. Let us keep our fights in our own house, and tell those ambassadors to go back to where they came from or mind the business of the countries they represent without interfering in ours. Let us tell our neighbours to keep their intelligence networks in check in our land for if not and they continue to engage in political activities of subversion and exploitation, and then let it be said the costs could be great.

Let all our people not become victims or pawns in somebody else's agenda of supporting separatism all over the world in countries that refuse to submit to their empires. Let us also stand steadfast in our resolve to oppose all separatist elements there are also very much part of the greater agenda of these empire builders.

The world is seeing too much conflict and bitterness - we must all understand and stand up against all those who are fundamentally responsible for the troubles that prevail.

There is a hidden hand of some INGOs/NGO's behind the current crisis that is facing the country being blown out of proportion both nationally and internationally to carry out their agendas.

Therefore let us save our children from the machinations of the likes of all those who work in cohesion to undermine the integrity of nations through neo-colonial agendas for world dominance.


Disclaimer: The comments contained within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfer and do not necessarily represent those of LankaWeb.com. .

BACK TO LATEST NEWS

DISCLAIMER

Copyright © 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reproduction In Whole Or In Part Without Express Permission is Prohibited.