JVP, Norwegians and Peace Process

K. Godage

POINT OF VIEW: The JVP's most recent statement which reads as follows cannot be faulted. It is indeed worth reproducing. "The JVP stands for a viable, vibrant multi-ethnic, muti-cultural, multi-religious democratic society in a unitary state with full democratic rights for all individuals. Our politburo has not considered a federal solution only a unitary one.

It is our belief that the main problem for Sri Lanka today, for Tamils, Muslims and the Sinhalese and others alike is the totalitarian control by the LTTE in its self proclaimed traditional homeland from where it has chased away all non-Tamil nationalities and has killed off all non LTTE Tamil opposition.

We value Anandasangaree of the TULF as one of the brave proponents of Democracy for Tamils. He agrees with us that Tamils are not second class citizens who should be denied democratic rights to be ruled by the iron fist of a self proclaimed Sun God. Yet as in all democratic discourse we do not necessarily have to agree with all his stands including that on federalism. It is the essence of the democratic process to disagree."

Who could disagree? The JVP has indeed come along way and we must respect them for it. The JVP has also faulted those that describe them as "hardliners" but not use the same words to describe the LTTE.

The JVP appears to transforming itself into a responsible democratic political party and should be assisted in every way we can.

The JVP told Parliament last Tuesday that Norway should be removed from the facilitation role. The Government has responded that we have no intention of getting rid of the Norwegian facilitation in the peace process despite the demand of the JVP. It is in the interest of the JVP and the country to examine the feasibility of the JVP demand.

Consequences of war

What would be the consequences of the Norwegians being asked to leave or them pulling out? Yes it is indeed easy to request the Norwegians to leave, they would like the IPKF before them pack up and leave and what may be the consequences? It was the JVP that mounted a campaign to have the IPKF expelled and the LTTE exploited the opportunity which the JVP created and where has that left us? The JVP could not possibly wish us to go to war? There are many who claim and believe that the JVP would welcome a war with the LTTE.

I personally do not think the JVP is that stupid for they fully understand the consequences of war. There is absolutely no guarantee that we could finish off the LTTE. As it is our military has suffered debacles at Pooneryn (November 1993), Mullaitivu in 1996, Paranthan in 1997, Killinochchi in 1998, The Jayasikuru operation in 1996, the Rana Ghosa rout in the Vanni in 1999, Elephant Pass in April 2000, and operation Agni Kheela in April 2001, apart from over 17000 of our Servicemen dead and a further 2500 listed as 'missing in action' presumed dead.

The toll of the exchequer was enormous.

The losses amounted to over four billion or four thousand million rupees (just reflect on that alone). Corruption was rampant, military procurement was scandalous with the charge that outdated, unnecessary and inappropriate equipment was purchased.

The impact on the economy was such that it almost killed off the tourist trade, foreign investment dried up and unemployment reached dizzy heights and this was only a part of the story. Do we have to go through that again? Does the JVP wish to plunge this country into chaos as some claim? Surly not, they must therefore undertake a serious study of the issue.

Meanwhile we must take note of the fact that the LTTE is twice as strong as they were before the ceasefire. They have as they did thrice before entered into the CFA with one objective namely to use the ceasefire to strengthen themselves militarily.

It has been reported in recent days that the LTTE is collecting millions of US Dollars from the Diaspora for what they describe as the final assault. The previous UNP administration was accused of neglecting the Armed Services and compromising the security of the country; the former President claimed that as the reason for taking over the Defence portfolio. She however did nothing to improve the situation either.

The JVP wishes that we ask Norway to leave; the Norwegians are here more or less by leave of India. It has even been alleged that they have been fronting for India, which is not inconceivable. It is said that the Norwegians clear every move of theirs with Delhi. Norway has also the support of the US, the twenty five countries of the EU and Japan, which is the principal donor country for Sri Lanka's development.

When US Under Secretary of State visited here last month he stated as follows: "We are supporting the core role, played by Norway. I had a very good meeting with Minister Eric Solheim this afternoon. I told him that we support his efforts 100 per cent and that he can rely on the United States to back him up". The JVP must take account of this in its own interest.

Facilitation of the peace process is also extremely costly. Norway not only funds the three Peace Secretariats but also the Monitoring Mission and has met the expenses involved when Talks were held in various capitals besides investing much time and money on the effort.

I would not know of any country which would be prepared to come forward to meet such liabilities, certainly India will not (India did not wish to even join the Co-Chairs) and neither will the UN for the problem in Sri Lanka is not a threat to international peace and security. The US and Japan are also not interested though they will play a supportive role. If the Norwegians leave who does the JVP think could play the role of a facilitator?

I am someone who in a published article described the CFA immediately after it was signed as a sell out and accused Solheim in particular of being a dishonest broker and of having crafted the CFA to assist the LTTE to establish themselves in Government controlled areas and also protested the fact that the Facilitators and the head of the Monitoring Mission were from the same country and also drew attention to some of their biased pro LTTE actions and publicly called for the removal of the one time head of the SLMM one Telliesson or a person with a similar sounding name, Today I am nevertheless resigned to the fact that we have no option but to deal through the Norwegians as there are no other takers and we would face a most difficult situation vis-a-vis the LTTE.

Its just not Norway alone but the international community too are perceived in some important quarters as being sympathetic towards the LTTE. We must on all accounts ensure that we do not antagonize them and isolate the country in the process. We must not forget what happened to this country when we provoked India by tilting towards the west during the Cold War years. Sri Lanka found itself left alone contending with the full might of India.

The leadership had misread the global and regional politico-strategic realities and miscalculated in making our traditional friends choose between us and India. The obvious in real politic happened, as the less important international actor was expendable for a far more important one. Yes Sri Lanka found itself abandoned by its friends. Let us not relive history.

Let us also examine as to why the international community is perceived in some quarters as being sympathetic to the LTTE. They expect the international community to help us crush the insurgency and why they ask are they holding back when there is an international commitment to fight terrorism in all its forms and everywhere.

The answer to this which comes from the international community itself would no doubt be unpalatable to many. A former American Ambassador once stated (and he was expressing the views of his colleagues here) "Until we perceive that the Sinhalese majority are prepared to concede equal rights to the minorities who inhabit your land we cannot extend any military support to help you crush the insurgency which we feel has resulted from discrimination against the Tamil people in particular". So if we wish to have the LTTE banned or their fund raising stopped we would first have to address the issue of Tamil rights.

Yes the LTTE has committed horrendous crimes and killed thousands of innocent civilians, they have in fact committed crimes against humanity and the international community, but for making pious condemnations has done nothing tangible to support us. Why? One of the reasons is that during our 'Socialist years' we had nationalized all foreign owned undertakings and the countries that had economic interests here such as the UK and the US have no economic interests to protect.

The second reason for not assisting us is of course what they do impress upon us as often as they could, namely that we have denied the minorities, particularly the Tamil people equal rights. This is a perception that we need to relate to.

The US Under Secretary Nicholas Burns acknowledged that Sri Lanka's minority Tamil population has legitimate grievances but urged the Tamils to address those grievances through dialogue with the Government. "We think it's imperative that every step be taken by the Sri Lankan Government and other parties to the conflict to show support to the Tamil community, for the needs of the Tamil community, and respect for the rights of the Tamil community".

(To be continued)