Civil war talk debunked

In his recent interview with the Tamilan Express President Mahinda Rajapaksa debunked the belief in some circles that there is a civil war situation here.

ETHNIC PROBLEM: Answering a question whether the recent meetings the TNA members had with the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Karunanidhi and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh would help end the civil war and solve the ethnic problem through negotiations, President Rajapaksa was quick to correct the questioner, saying there is no civil war in Sri Lanka.

As the President said: "I wish to make a correction to your question. There is no civil war in Sri Lanka. What we have is an internal conflict and the current military actions are a defensive operation against the terrorist offensive actions launched by the LTTE.

The civilian population both among the Sinhalese and Tamils is not involved in this armed conflict. Therefore, there is no question of a civil war."

The talk of there being a civil war situation here is a favourite among some sections of so-called civil society, particularly those who see much profit for themselves in the more recent discipline of Conflict Resolution.

The shallow think-tanks of civil society have for sometime been describing the conditions here as those of a civil war, with peace profiteers even issuing statements and giving interview to the foreign media stressing that what is seen here is civil war.

The President's answer should silence these people, especially with his explanation that, "The civilian population both among the Sinhalese and Tamils is not involved in this armed conflict. Therefore, there is no question of a civil war".

In the interview with the Tamilan Express, President Rajapaksa also took on another favourite issue, particularly with the Tamil Nadu media and politicians. This is the regular howl of horror at the alleged targeting of Tamils by the Security Forces and the resultant hardships suffered by the Tamils.

While not denying difficulties faced by the Tamil community today, the President said: "It is unfortunate that no Tamil Nadu political parties voiced their concern or sympathy to innocent civilians, including women and children, who died in incidents perpetrated by the LTTE.

Even in the past, when the LTTE attacked civilians, these parties were silent. Another unfortunate aspect that has emerged is that these parties and individuals also completely ignore the sufferings the LTTE has inflicted on the large Muslim population which has been chased away by the LTTE.

Even the Sinhalese people living in the North and East have suffered due to the atrocities of the LTTE which are not even mentioned by the media or some political parties in Tamil Nadu."

Dashed hopes

The hopes of many who were eagerly waiting the UN Security Council to issue a strong criticism of the Sri Lankan Government, if not impose sanctions on the country over alleged Security Forces complicity in the recruitment of child soldiers, were dashed last week.

The great expectations that many had about the Allan Rock report, and how it would adversely affect Sri Lanka's foreign aid came to naught. In the event what Allan Rock did was to ask for targeted measures against the LTTE for continued recruitment of children for armed combat.

At the meeting of the UN Security Council's Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict held on February 9, 2007, both Radhika Coomaraswamy, Representative of the Secretary-General on Children and Armed Conflict, and Advisor to the Special Representative, Ambassador Allan Rock, presenting a report on his visit to Sri Lanka, appealed to the Working Group to consider the imposition of targeted measures against the LTTE.

Ambassador Rock also highlighted that going by UNICEF estimates, since 2001, the LTTE appeared to have recruited over 18,000 children as combatants. He also expressed regret that the commitment made to him by the LTTE leadership to cease child recruitment by 1st January, 2007 had not been honoured.

This must have come as a major disappointment to those who were making predictions that the Security Council would take very strong action against Sri Lanka over this issue, which would be a serious negative signal to donor countries and aid agencies.

In the event the position of the Sri Lankan Government has been vindicated, and those who were singing jeremiads for Sri Lanka in advance, and even had their celebratory statements and editorials ready, had to be satisfied with humble pie.

Iraq - Iran deja vu

There is enough evidence of a civil war raging in Iraq, which is firmly denied by all those who have caused it, particularly President Bush and Prime Minister Blair, despite considerable proof of civil war conditions prevailing there.

Unlike the Sri Lankan situation, where as President Rajapaksa explains, the civilian population both among the Sinhalese and Tamils is not involved in the armed conflict and therefore, there is no question of a civil war; the civilians have been dragged into the tragedy of civil war in Iraq.

For those who dare not utter the words civil war with regard to Iraq, to claim there is such a development here shows much more mischief than folly, of which many a so-called votary of peace is guilty.

Civil war aside, it is interesting to see the replay of developments that preceded the invasion of Iraq for regime change and oil wealth, carried out by the Bush-Blair alliance of Christian and "Democratic" fundamentalists, in the new attempts to justify armed intervention or regime change in Iran.

With the mainstream western media that abetted in the invasion of Iraq through its silence joining in again, we now see the attempts to show that the Iranian people are looking for a change at the top.

There also the new "smoking guns" in the form of Iranian explosive devises found in Iraq, that are touted as being even more deadly today than the infamous stories of WMDs that preceded the invasion of Iraq.

Diplomacy

It is clear that George W Bush is making every effort to be remembered as the US President who not only presided over the dismembering of Iraq, but also the one who humbled Iran.

Whether he can achieve the later as easily as he did the former is yet to be seen. But the signs are that he is in earnest see it happen.

Strangely though, following the agreement reached over the North Korean Nuclear Programme in the five-nation talks, the US is portraying new interest in diplomacy, which one did not see in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.

At the press conference that followed the reported agreement on the North Korean Nukes, Condoleezza Rice was heard emphasizing that the lesson from this for Iran was not that the US caves into pressure, but rather of the success of multi-lateral diplomacy.

There was no explanation as to why the US was sending in aircraft carriers with anti-missile weapons close to Iran, and raising the decibels of confrontation through the Iranian manufactured weapons allegedly found in Iraq, if the US believed so much in diplomacy.

Rather, the message to the US from North Korean development should be that even in dealing with the Iranian Mullahs that they may hate, diplomacy can produce better results than aircraft carriers in the Middle East.