|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 16 October 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Carte blanche or escape hatch? In its attempt to erase the image of isolation in the southern consultative process it has earned for itself or an effort to create further obstacles for negotiations, the UNP attempts a show of magnanimity. "The UNP gives carte blanche to government", said one newspaper, referring to Ranil Wickremesinghe's last letter to the President, about the UNP seeing no purpose in consensus building efforts before talks are resumed. Talk first and seek consensus later is the UNP's current slogan, in an effort to show its apparent commitment to a negotiated peace, while concealing the fact that its very suggestion is a major obstacle to negotiations. What those who look at it with green tinted glasses see as a carte blanche has pre-condition too, in the requirement that the UNP's unmitigated support will be for talks based on the ISGA. It's only an echo of what the TNA and LTTE says. This is the very issue on which consensus is needed in the South, if talks are to resume soon. Going for talks based on the LTTE's ISGA and nothing else will leave no room for consensus in the South. A repeat performance It is the replay of the UNP's obstruction and foot dragging over the possibilities of peace, with the PA Government's proposals for Constitutional Reform presented in 2005. Once referred to a Select Committee of Parliament there were 77 sittings on it. To none of these did the UNP bring even one document setting out its position on the proposals before the committee. What its representatives led by the late A. C. S. Hameed did was to say they will report what was discussed to the party and come back with their proposals the next day. The days came and went on 77 occasions but nothing was forthcoming. This is proof of the UNP's lack of commitment to peace, unless it is something imposed on the people at the wish of the LTTE. Later, when the proposals as amended by the Select Committee (without any UNP input), was presented to Parliament, the UNP again wanted time to make its proposals. After a several months it did make some wishy-washy proposals about which it was not very clear in its own mind. Later it spent several more months in discussions with the President Kumaratunga, till finally in August 2000 it agreed to most of the proposals. The UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe posed with the President what was in fact a handshake of betrayal, announcing agreement. Two days later the UNP refused to support what they had agreed to without the approval of the Maha Sangha. The Maha Sangha speaks The UNP which made the endorsement of the Draft Constitution in August 2000 by the Maha Sangha a sine qua non to its own support for it, does not see the participation of the Mahanayake Theras at the inauguration of the National Advisory Committee on Peace and Reconciliation (NACPR) as endorsement of the consultative process by the Maha Sangha. It now ignores repeated requests by the Mahanayake Thera of Malwatte that it should participate in the consultations of the NACPR. His first was an appeal to the UNP to set aside party differences and join the consultative process. The Mahanayake Thera went further, when he met a delegation of the TNA earlier this week where he was unambiguous in stating that both the TNA and UNP should participate in the NACPR. It is now clear that the UNP 's so-called carte blanche to the Government to begin negotiations based on the ISGA, is in fact an escape hatch for it to later say that it did not obstruct negotiations. What is clear is that the UNP is in fact obstructing the resumption of talks by insisting that they be based on the ISGA, which has been seen by local opinion as well as the US, EU and even Norway as going far beyond the scope of federalism and the Oslo declaration made during the UNP 's own peace process. When the UNP insists as it does that talks be resumed immediately, based on the ISGA, what does it say of the observations by its own "peace spokesman" the unstoppable professor about major items in the ISGA that were unacceptable to the UNP? The UNP has not yet explained what these objectionable items are. Surely, if the UNP wants the Government to resume talks based on the ISGA, about which it had major differences, it has a duty by the public to keep them informed what their own areas of disagreements are. The absence of such explanation gives the UNP the image of opportunism, in obstructing the progress of negotiations for what it believes to be its narrow political gains, linked to the goals of the TNA and LTTE. From reports of what the TNA told the Mahanayake Thera of Malwatte, there are doubts about it representing the LTTE, which it says is the sole representative of the Tamils. The reason is their assurance to the Mahanayake that they were opposed both to war and division of the country. Was it Sampanthan speaking after sitting through what Clare Short had to say, or was it a specially scripted statement from the Vanni for the occasion? The fact being that the LTTE has neither given up war nor abandoned its demand for a separate state. Tilak dances to TNA fiddle Back in the fold of the UNP, the one time leader of Sihala Urumaya and Secretary of the JHU Tilak Karunaratne must be cosy in green company. As to political opportunism, it is interesting to see him in the present UNP that supports the ISGA, and is an extension of the TNA in politics. Having shed his slough to show tiger stripes within, he will now enjoy dancing to the TNA fiddle, and supporting the fascism of the LTTE. Gone Sihala Urumaya and whither Patali Champaka Ranawaka? |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
