Strange series of events

Muthu PADMAKUMARA

President Mahinda Rajapaksa

General Fonseka is in something of a predicament after making his statement about Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. He has made several contradictory announcements since then that need to be examined in greater depth, beyond the face of a public political statement. One cannot believe that he had made these charges willy-nilly. It must be realized that this was a pre-planned declaration.

Giving an ‘exclusive’ interview to the Sunday Leader, specifically its editor, is a clear indicator of pre-planning. The statement made was a critical one. The Government, the Army, Army Commander, and many of this country’s people see General Fonseka’s ‘revelations’ as a great ‘betrayal’.

What is the background to this scene?

General Fonseka claims that Gotabhaya Rajapaska had ordered to shoot terrorists who sought to surrender under a white flag. Actually he doesn’t say ‘terrorists under a white flag,’ he names Nadesan, Pulidevan and Ramesh of the LTTE. He claims these LTTE cadres were shot by troops, and insinuates that the ambush was designed by Gotabhaya and Basil Rajapaksa. Though General Fonseka names ‘Nadesan,’ ‘Pulidevan,’ and ‘Ramesh,’ at an immediate glance you are given the impression that innocent civilians crossing over under a white flag had been shot under orders. The White Flag is an international sign of truce or surrender. Shooting a white-flag bearer is a war-crime. Let us consider the implications of this play.

Now, having made such a charge, General Fonseka then follows up with several more announcements. First he says that what he said is being “wrongly misrepresented,” and then he speaks through a Tamil newspaper, or a Tamil newspaper reports that shooting white-flag bearers is ‘shameful crime.’ He then says, “I didn’t say that,” or that there were no white-flag bearers (or was it white-flag bearing terrorists?). It’s quite difficult to untangle these series of pronouncements. And he adds further that he will take “full responsibility for actions during the war.”

He has previously stated that he wasn’t in the country during the last stages of the war. He now draws in the name of another war-hero, Shavendra de Silva, and that it was to him that Gotabhaya Rajapaksa gave the order to.

Shavendra Silva is another war-figure like General Fonseka who had won equal respect of the country through the war. General Fonseka by making this statement also degrades another war-hero. There is one key point about these contradictory statements by the General. Though he retracted, even denied his statements subsequently, why did he make them in the first place?

Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa

It must be repeated that this was not a general political statement made to the public. There must be a backdrop to this, because if he is the common candidate of the Opposition, then Ranil Wickremesinghe would’ve been aware that he would make this statement. Mangala Samaraweera would’ve been aware of it.

The JVP would’ve known. At the same time another concern arises. The editor of the Island also raises this point.

Greater attention needs to be paid to this latest scene, because Robert O’Blake announced on his arrival in the island, that United States will not be looking into war-crimes in relation to Sri Lanka. And of course he did meet General Fonseka while he was here on his visit.

Shortly after Robert O’Blake left Sri Lanka, General Fonseka comes forward with his dramatic statement. Looking back at America’s attitude in the past, one feels that the United States would’ve preferred to tame the likes of Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. Or as General Fonseka claimed during his American fiasco, the United States is in pursuit of Gotabhaya Rajapaksa over war-crimes.

Is this the intention behind General Fonseka’s recent statements?

What the Government supporters and the Government should realize is that, yes, they have gained a political victory by calling General Fonseka’s statements in his interview a ‘great betrayal’. And a strong feeling of that has risen among the general populace and the Army. But one must not forget that General Fonseka did this deliberately. He, his statements are a corruptive virus.

And he had introduced, carefully planted it in the international body. Now for the first time the Army Commander who oversaw the Army during the war claims that Gotabhaya Rajapaksa ordered people to be shot in cold blood. Is it General Fonseka’s motive to insert this bomb, this virus into the international community? Clearly the Government needs to probe beyond the surface of this matter, and do so immediately.

Not only condemning General Fonseka’s statements, or using it as a political tool, the Government needs to examine the options to bring a severe sentence against this premeditated act of treason.