Rapp Report sheds more light on US hypocrisy on human rights

“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye,” Matthew 7.3.

The past two weeks have given enough cause to recall this quote from Jesus Christ on hypocrisy and deceit, especially in considering statements from the United States on Sri Lanka and developments there that affect matters of human rights and armed conflict.

It was an ironical coincidence that the Report to Congress on Measures Taken by the Sri Lankan Government and International Bodies to Investigate Incidents During the Recent Conflict in Sri Lanka, and Evaluating the Effectiveness of Such Efforts by Stephen Rapp the US State Department’s Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes had to be issued on August 11, 2010, the very day that the Presidential Commission on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation (LLRC) held its first public sitting in Colombo.

The Rapp Report Executive Summary states: “The LLRC is less than halfway through its six month term (it was established May 14, 2010). Initial actions taken by the Government including aspects of the naming of commissioners and publication of terms of reference detailed in this report, have raised concerns regarding the LLRC’s mandate and its independence.

Hypocrisy

Accordingly, the State Department will continue to evaluate whether the LLRC is acting in accordance with best practices derived from broad experience as well as utilizing its powers as described in the Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Law of 1978.” Clearly, the witch hunt is on.

The delay in issuing the Rapp Report, put off on two occasions within a month, indicates a conflict within the State Department itself on how the situation in Sri Lanka is to be addressed. It is now clear that Ambassador Rapp has had to accept Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s welcoming the appointment of the LLRC, while still trying to satisfy the lobbyists who seek to sling mud on Sri Lanka and raise questions of credibility on the LLRC, which interestingly was in sync with the BBC’s reporting of its first public sitting.

There was even more glaring irony in that the Rapp Report was almost coincident to the opening of the trial of Omar Khadr, the child soldier of Canadian origin who was captured in Afghanistan in 2002 at age 15, and had been held in Guantanamo for the past eight years. This is also the first trial to be held at Guantanamo Bay since Barack Obama became US president and promised to close this much condemned detention facility.

Ambassador Rapp states that, in addition to monitoring developments, the State Department will continue to evaluate whether the commission (LLRC) is acting consistent with other best practices derived from broad experience as well as utilizing its powers as described in the Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Law of 1978, and a list of specific benchmarks with relate to the competence, fairness and credibility of the Commission. It begins the work of discrediting the LLRC by raising questions about the impartiality of its Chairman, CR de Silva PC, former Attorney General, especially with regard to his role is emphasizing the sovereignty of Sri Lanka to the members of the former International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP). Suffice it to state that the LLRC Chairman was at that time carrying out his obligation and duty as the Chief Prosecuting Officer of the Government, which can in no way be considered as any conflict of interest in today’s context and his integrity as a person, and raises no questions about his knowledge of law, both local and international.

US child soldier

Moving on to the aspect of hypocrisy in the US position on Sri Lanka, which has all to do with its stated commitment to upholding Human Rights, one has to ask whether Ambassador Rapp or any others in the US Administration have any serious observations to make on the trial of a child soldier, arrested at age 15, not known to have been carrying arms, and being tried after eights years in virtual solitary confinement.

Would the State Department or any other US body continue to monitor this case for the obvious questions of Human Rights its raises, especially with regard to the treatment of children, be they child soldiers or not.

It is also interesting that the attempts to hold Sri Lanka accountable for a whole series of alleged offences involving the last phase in a prolonged period of brutal armed confrontation, carried out by what the FBI itself described as the ‘most ruthless terrorist organization in the world’, will also not raise the issue of accountability of the US with regard to all those violations of human rights, rules of engagement in armed conflict, the Geneva Conventions on such matters, and the blatant disregard for the safety of human life in the military operation in Afghanistan from 2004 till 2009, exposed by Wikileaks, and still being pursued with even more vigour and violence.

While the ‘international community’ of western powers continued to seek accountability from Sri Lanka, manipulating the office and person of the UN Secretary General too for this purpose, there was an interesting aspect of hypocrisy on human rights that was exposed by Bernard Goonetilake, former Ambassador and first Director General of Sri Lanka’s Peace Secretariat, in his evidence before the LLRC last Tuesday. This is of special relevance because there is much international interest today in the trial in Guantanamo of the child soldier Omar Khadr.

Ambassador Goonetilake described how when questions on Human Rights violations in the North and East of Sri Lanka, then largely under the LTTE, was raised at negotiations in 2002-03, the LTTE had not wanted any international organization (not even from the US, Europe or UN] to be invited to investigate this. However, an organization that was challenging Sri Lanka’s sovereignty had stated that they will be happy for Sri Lanka’s own National Human Rights Commission to carry out any such investigations. That was a strange concession to be given by the LTTE, except for the fact that it knew very well that the writ of the Colombo administration did not apply in most of those areas.

Goonetilake said something even more interesting on the LTTE’s attitude to child soldiers. When the matter of stopping its forcible recruitment of children was repeatedly raised, its chief negotiator Anton Balasingham had brought the matter to a close by asking whether we (Sri Lankan negotiators) would like to see his neck being cut, gesturing with his forefinger across his neck.

In sharp contrast to the LTTE’s attitude to child soldiers that is now forgotten in many sections due to the selective amnesia of the ‘international community’ and the so-called Tamil Diaspora, Ambassador Rapp whose mandate is on war crimes, and others who will continue to monitor developments on Human Rights and aspects of reconciliation in Sri Lanka, would do well to see and study how Sri Lanka deals with its former child soldiers, who were carrying arms for the LTTE; especially the rehabilitation and re-training process and their rapid absorption into society.