Int’l community’s responsibility for ravage caused by LTTE
Don Wijewardana
The three decade history of terrorism in Sri Lanka is not only a
history of so much bungling by so many elected leaders of the country,
but also a history of how so many Western governments, international
organisations and NGOs were fooled for so long by LTTE. International
community which promoted LTTE and persecuted Sri Lanka on the basis of
false information needs to bear part of the responsibility for the havoc
created by them for so long.
The end came fast. By Saturday the last of the remaining 50,000
hostages were rescued. And by Monday it was all over. After having
rescued 250,000 hostages earlier it was thought releasing the last lot
held as a human shield by the terrorists could not be accomplished
without much bloodshed.
The whole world was watching with baited breath. Clinton, Brown, UN’s
Pillay and the European Union as well as the INGOs waited to see a
‘blood bath’ and a ‘human catastrophe’.They warned the government of
“severe consequences for its actions”.
Security Forces had to quench the thirst caused by the so-called
saviour of the tamils |
But their hopes were dashed when a well planned and superbly executed
strategy of the armed forces accomplished the mission without any loss
of civilian life. Sri Lanka thus achieved the most successful largest
ever hostage rescue mission anywhere in the world. The international
community was stunned by its success; so much so, none of them could
gulp the pride to congratulate Sri Lankan government.
Not even the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Isn’t her job, as
she claims, to be “the voice of the victim everywhere”? Was there some
confusion as to who the victims were? Or perhaps they were questioning
how dare a puny developing country achieve such a feat when a number of
major players have failed in much smaller operations?
The cost
Anyway that’s all behind us now. But the cost of three decades of
ravage caused by the LTTE is yet to be calculated: there is no doubt it
is colossal. The loss of 80,000 lives, countless maimed, thousands of
families who continue to suffer from the loss of loved ones and many
more displaced, are only one aspect. The other is the social and
economic wellbeing that a generation of people had to sacrifice.
The cost is not confined to any community or any group. It transcends
Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslim and the entire nation. Who is responsible for
allowing that scale of violence to last that long to exact such a heavy
toll?
There is no doubt a major part of the responsibility lies with short
sighted and ineffective political leadership of the country. For many of
them, although it devastated the country, terrorism was of lower order
priority than vying for political power. They were also convinced of the
invincibility of LTTE, an idea Prabhakaran successfully ingrained in
their minds through brutal massacre of civilians using suicide bombers
and assassination of political leaders.
Ceasefire Agreement
The worst of the government deeds came with the signing of the
ceasefire agreement (CFA) of 2002. It had several devastating impacts.
One was the freedom it gave the LTTE during the four years of the
agreement to expand its military infrastructure including, adding four
new battalions, expanding naval capability - the Sea Tigers, and
establishing the nascent air force.
During the period it also built up its arsenal with heavy and modern
equipment and established modern communication systems all in
preparation for war.
* Clinton,
Brown, UN’s Pillay and the European Union’s
“blood bath” hopes reduced into pieces
* The international community
could gulp the pride to congratulate
Sri Lankan government three decades of ravage caused by
the LTTE is yet to be calculated:
* 2002 CFA gave wings to the
idea of a separate state
* LTTE led by Prabhakaran was
far more deadly than Al Qaeda.
* The US and the UK went out of
their way to pressure the IMF to prevent supporting Sri Lanka
|
It also enabled the Tigers to some extent dictate the terms of the
peace process, establishing itself as the sole representative of the
Tamil minority, a status denied to it earlier. Thus, the peace process
accorded parity to the LTTE with the elected Government at the
negotiating table.
More importantly, the CFA gave wings to the idea of a separate state
through international involvement in the peace process. It brought
Norway, US, Japan and the EU as guarantors or peace monitors. For the
first time the international community was involved in a big way in the
Sri Lankan issue bringing with it hordes of INGOs.
It gave some in the NGO industry, posing under the banner of ‘civil
society’, the licence to intervene in Sri Lanka in very uncivilized
ways. The outcome was an essentially domestic issue becoming a full
blown an international concern.
The CFA also generated great political expectations among the Tamil
population, especially the diaspora, of Prabhakaran’s ability to deliver
their dream of a separate state. The diaspora involvement filled LTTE
coffers, through legitimate contributions as well as extortions, drug
deals, credit card fraud, human trafficking and other vices, along with
enhanced ability to acquire arms while at the same time promoting its
legitimacy overseas.
International responsibility
While the bungling Sri Lankan political leaders offered a free hand
to the LTTE to implement its nefarious agenda the Tigers set out
systematically to establish within the international arena its case as
the underdog, a helpless minority discriminated against by the Sinhalese
majority based on the fact that Sri Lankan population consisted of 74
per cent Sinhalese and 12 per cent Tamils.
The crux of its claim of denial of human rights was this statistic.
There were areas that needed improvement but the claim was fundamentally
based on falsehoods and half truths generated by the swift LTTTE
propaganda machine1.
But it fitted the human rights abuse model like a glove. This was
pointed out over and over but it was dismissed by the West and the INGOs
as implausible.
Indeed it was implausible as no other country would have treated a
minority better than some of the majority.
But the campaign of misinformation continued to gain currency now
with the well organised NGOs picking up the case.
The success of the campaign is evident in Obama during his election
campaign making a distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters
and including LTTE in the latter category.
A feeble effort of a weak government machinery to counter this
propaganda was no match to the well polished performance of the LTTTE
and the NGOs. The irony is the deception continued for three decades
with none of these groups questioning the validity of the claim.
The riots of 1983 were a disaster that the government should have
averted. The damage caused to the Tamil community was high and it was
seen as evidence of discrimination. But the increase in the proportion
of Tamils living among the Sinhalese in the south increasing to 55 per
cent showed that the riots did not leave any lasting impact on the
friendly coexistence of the two communities.
However, it led to Western countries opening their borders for an
influx of Tamil “refugees” from Sri Lanka. Once they became established
as voters it was the politician’s lot to pander to their demands.
From then on whether the information on which they persecuted Sri
Lanka was false or not did not really matter.
While this was going on, these governments could not ignore the
mountain of evidence that the LTTE was a terrorist organisation. By all
accounts the LTTE led by Prabhakaran was far more deadly than Al Qaeda.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has described it as the “most
dangerous and deadly extremists” in the world and ranked it ahead of Al
Qaeda and Hamas.
So, when Al Qaeda was banned there were no grounds not to ban the
LTTE in US and the EU. But it was a Clayton’s ban - a ban imposed when
you don’t want to have a ban. With mounting pressure from sympathisers
these governments were unwilling to fully implement provisions relating
to banned organisations. So they were allowed to raise funds and carry
on the propaganda making a mockery of the law. Fund raising in the West
boosted LTTE coffers.
According to Jane’s Defence Weekly (JDW) the group had a profit
margin that would be the envy of any multinational corporation - some
USD200 to 300 million per year. The Tamil Tigers, JDW claims, was
consequently the only known insurgent organisation with its own army,
navy and even a rudimentary air force, with access to financial
resources and weapons giving it the luxury of introducing bold, new
dimensions to the conflict.
It goes on to say the LTTE had created one of the most sophisticated
insurgencies in the world, largely due to a complex global network of
financial resources and weapons that are integral to prolonging its
campaign for a separate Tamil state in Sri Lanka”.
JDW noted further that “in addition, the LTTE creates and staffs some
charitable organisations, projecting its influence through this front to
raise money from Tamil communities and, ultimately, convert the gains
into arms. The system works as an efficient way to move funds wherever
investment or procurement opportunities arise while utilising a
charitable fa‡ade’s tax-free status and legitimacy”.
The west turning a blind eye to the activities of an organisation
“banned” by them was a major factor that allowed the LTTE to thrive.
Financial strangulation
While the LTTE was using its vast earnings to purchase arms from
anywhere Western countries were cutting their aid to Sri Lanka on
account of the so called human rights violations.
As Jeremy Page of the Times noted, by 2007 US aid to Sri Lanka had
declined to a mere $ 7.4 million and British funding to just 1.25
million pounds. In addition US also ceased arms sales to Sri Lanka.
The attempt at strangling Sri Lanka financially to stop the
government offensive against the terrorists did not stop there. The US
and the UK went out of their way to pressure the IMF to prevent
supporting Sri Lanka.
Clinton said “the time was not yet ripe for Sri Lanka to get the $1.9
billion IMF loan”. Egged on by Milliband, British foreign minister, she
went on to say “We think that it is not an appropriate time to consider
that until there is a resolution of this conflict. And that’s what we’re
focused on trying to help bring about”.
This was in spite of IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn
stating that Sri Lanka deserves the funding on account of the impact of
the global recession. As the Sri Lankan Central Bank observed the money
was a short term standby arrangement to help stabilise the balance of
payments and not for the purpose of financing the war. It is well known
how George W Bush manipulated the United Nations to get it to endorse
his Iraq policy.
Obama came to power promising to eliminate such behaviour by the
executive. It appears the practice has not ended with the exit of Bush.
The duplicity of the West is incomprehensible. On the one hand they
are engaged in a vicious war against Taleban and in the process bombing
out many innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
On the other hand when a far more vicious terror group was cornered
they were creating every possible obstacle to pressure Sri Lanka to
offer a ceasefire. Less than a fortnight earlier a 48 hour ceasefire was
declared by the government. But anyone attempting to escape was shot at
by the LTTE.
That was logical when they were holding them as a human shield. As
Kenneth Cooper points out in the Boston Globe those international voices
also ignored the pattern to pauses in this civil war:
The Tamil Tigers used every cease-fire to rest, recruit, and rearm.
Then they took the offensive. That’s how they broke a 2002 cease-fire.
Another ended in 1995 when the rebels, dramatically, sunk government
navy ships.
In these circumstances, as Cooper notes, complying with the request
would have been a major strategic mistake.
That would have been a recipe for perpetuation of terrorism with
attendant costs. Besides that, would these parties suggest a ceasefire
if Osama Bin Laden was cornered like that? These are only a few examples
of the role played by western governments in nurturing the LTTE.
Then along with INGOs and the UN by persecuting the Sri Lankan
government they all have contributed in a significant way to the
perpetuation of LTTE for which Sri Lanka has paid dearly. In fact they
would have succeeded too if not for countries such as China, Russia,
Japan, and India who stood to defend and support Sri Lanka financially
and strategically. If not for them Sri Lanka would still be embroiled in
fighting.
It is amusing to see the extent of patronising by the west that is
still going on regardless. Senate Foreign Relations Committee said “we
urge the Government of Sri Lanka to take immediate steps to alleviate
the humanitarian crisis in the north for hundreds of thousands of
internally displaced persons”.
In a strange conclusion to the press release it also called on the
government to protect, among others, Doctors Varatharajah, Shanmugarajah,
and Sathiyamurthy. These doctors provided information on the numbers
killed and hospitals damaged by firing.
In the meantime Gordon Brown had rung the President to ask him to
involve Tamils in an inclusive political future for the country.
For Pete’s sake Sri Lanka has been a functioning democracy ever since
independence and there is a duly elected government in power dealing
with issues relating to minorities. Why shouldn’t it be treated any
different from an elected government of the West?
A simple test before proffering such advice should be ‘How would they
feel if President Rajapaksa advised how to deal with their own domestic
issues?
The inability to dictate terms to satisfy their own pressure groups
would have been seen as a major setback by some of these western powers.
Perhaps that is the reason for not acknowledging the world’s greatest
hostage rescue, or congratulating Sri Lanka for bring to a successful
close a civil war that has lasted nearly three decades.
In fact what Sri Lanka deserves is an apology for everything that the
West had done to prolong terrorism in the country. But it is unlikely
Sri Lanka will get either. Instead, it appears the international
community is on a campaign of revenge for noncompliance with their
edicts. UN Human Rights Council is being invoked to meet next week to
bring action.
Don Wijewardana is an economist and
freelance journalist. Email:[email protected]. |