Voice of Tigers and the free media

Palitha Senanayake

The recent attack on the Tiger transmitting station in Kilinochchi has evoked condemnation from the most unexpected quarters. The Director General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the 'Reporters sans Frontiers (RSF), have all joined the chorus of condemnation initiated by a local organisation called the 'Free Media Movement' in Sri Lanka.

It is a well known fact that there are some inveterate Tiger loyalists in the South masquerading as champions of worthy causes acting to promote the interest of the LTTE.

In the present context of accommodative thinking, the existence of such organisations, is acknowledged as a sign of a truly democratic society. But when the activities of such organisation stretch beyond local limits of influence the world opinion, then the State and particularly the Government have to take cognisance of this situation.

The concerns raised by UNESCO, and RSF have to be construed as concerns expressed in the belief that the attack on the Voice of Tigers, is an attack on a media organisation, a member of the global media fraternity.

But does UNESCO and the RSF know what the Voice of Tigers stand for and what their media policy has been during all the years of their operation? Or have the local propagandists, being as subtle as they are, been able to ensconced in their propaganda the naked fascist nature of this media broadcasting station and their conduct, in the name of 'Media Freedom' ?

The fact that media freedom is an important tool of modern civilisation and that its responsible conduct has crystallised it as the Fourth Estate in national governance is beyond doubt.

In that context if the Government of the day has taken action to throttle the freedom of expression of its polity impinging upon this forth estate, then the concerns of UNESCO and the RSF could well be justified to that particular extent.

But in this case, is the polity's right to entertain democratic expressions being impaired by this attack ?

At the very outset it should be established that the Voice of Tigers is the official radio broadcasting Agency of the Libration Tigers of Tamil Eelam, banned as a terrorist organisation by the leading members of the international community. These member countries include the countries in which UNESCO and RSF operate.

The members of the international community are expected to be international consensus makers leading to the establishment of international norms. In that for UNESCO and the RSF to condemn the attack on the voice of Tigers, is to make a mockery of such international consensus building.

This international consensus was not a knee jerk reaction to some isolated violence of this particular LTTE, but the result of a careful evaluation of the activities of the LTTE by a very liberal minded international community. It has been established, again beyond doubt, that the LTTE is a terror organisation who have, either killed or caused to be killed thousands of people and still continue to do so adopting 'liberation' as a modus operandi.

In this light the UNESCO and the RSF, by their act of condemning the attack on the 'Voice of Tigers' have not only questioned the international norms but also have offered to patronise global terrorism that torments many a nation today in the world, developed or developing.

The question then is are these so called 'International bodies' work on a agenda that is diametrically opposed to the norms set by the majority in the international community thereby endangering those very goals set in the name of humanity?

That is from the international perspective. From the local perspective the reality is that the LTTE operates from the Sri Lankan soil and Sri Lanka is a country that have faced the scourge of terrorism for well over 30 years now.

All these years have inflicted, untold miseries upon the Sri Lankan people causing the deaths of about 75,000 and considerable damage on its fragile economy, when the country is trying to stand on its feet after 450 years of colonial exploitation.

How could a responsible Government tolerate such 'media freedom' when Tigers are the group that has posed the biggest threat to this nation State for the past 30 years, subjecting the people to terror, mayhem and murder threatening to tear this very nation asunder.

The conduct of this transmitting station becomes all the more serious in the context where this particular organisation, the LTTE, has refused to accept the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and have threatened, during the past few years, to declare war against the Sri Lankan society almost at the drop of a hat.

This is certainly not the type of conduct any self respecting Government worthy of its peoples' repository could condone in the name of 'free media'.

A Government that accommodates such an organisation that has no respect for the Government, law and order, democracy, and the very moral integrity, of the country within which they operate, would be guilty of promoting anarchy within its borders.

All these killings and mayhem resulted from the fact that the LTTE is a fascist organisation that has resorted to violence to achieve it's end. It has killed scores of democratic politicians, opinion makers, journalists, intellectuals and innumerable civilians for not agreeing with their way of thinking.

Among those killed by these organisations are democratic leaders of India and Sri Lanka who have endeavoured to wean them from violence and bring them to the democratic main stream.

LTTE is an organisation that has treated dissent with death so much so, it is difficult to find an organisation in the contemporary world that has treated its political opponent with such disdain inflicting the most cruel forms of death on them.

When the facts stand as they are, to destroy the official transmitters of such a despotic organisation should be treated as an act commensurate with press freedom and therefore should be hailed as victory to democratic and the other civilised norms of the free world.

Those who condemn such acts, are knowingly or unknowingly condemning the victory of freedom and democracy and championing the cause of fascism and brutal terrorism.

In Germany the Swasthika is banned and any talk in justifying Nazism could earn a man a few years in jail. Recently a British journalist was jailed for his book where he empathized the reasons for the holocaust of Jews during the Second World War. Would UNESCO and RSF hasten to condemn these acts as those against 'Free Media ?'

Those acts are condemned as crimes perpetrated against human civilisation. The difference between those and the LTTE is that while those acts are now history while the LTTE is ever present/kicking and have the capacity to kill, wound and create mayhem at its will. Is the place for wise judgement and appropriate action the record keepers of history?

Hence where do organisations such as UNESCO and RSF stand when they condemn the attack on 'Voice of Tigers' Isn't it these very organisations and their agendas that stand condemned?

Another perspective to this whole issue could be, is 'media', some form of fanatic religion that advocates 'Right or wrong it is my media brother?" Have media men developed their own professional cult disregarding civilised global norms ?

If that is the case I am afraid that media would be increasingly outdoing the very norms that made media enjoy the august position that it enjoys in the modern society. When Voltaire said that, "I do not agree with what you say but I agree with your right to say that and defend that right to my death", the context was very different from the present scenario in Sri Lanka.

Voltaire belonged to the enlightened age in Europe and that was the time the enlightened citizens wished that the Governments of Europe should be more accommodative of the views of the public and take note of constructive criticism for the betterment of the country. Media freedom, no doubt, is a device in modern civilisation but any good thing can be abused if it gets to the hands of the wrong party.

In any case Voltaire, when he said that, would not have expected, even in the wildest of this dreams, to 'defend to his death' the expressions and actions that justify the macabre designs of the LTTE, the very agent of death and destruction.