SL Armed Forces driven by humanitarian spirit

Text of the address delivered by Minister of External Affairs Professor G. L. Peiris, at the Defence Seminar held on August 8

I would like to begin by congratulating Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and the defence establishment on this very timely initiative. It can truly be described as the need of the hour. When there is a great deal of criticism founded on erroneous premises and there are false assumptions made, I think the best answer to this is complete, accurate, up to date information. That was precisely what was provided to all of you in abundant measure by the comprehensive presentation that was made by Mr. Gotabhaya Rajapaksa.

The purpose of this seminar is to focus on the role of the Armed Forces during the conflict, remembering that it is not a role that came to an end with the cessation of the conflict in May 2009. It is very much a vibrant and continuing role, and we need today to understand clearly the nature and the scope of that role. It is to create that understanding that this seminar was conceived of, and it is the spirit in which it is now being presented to you.

Minister Professor G. L. Peiris

I spoke of false impressions and misinformation. A great deal of this is attributable to local situations being approached from a cultural perspective, which is fundamentally different from the ground situation in Sri Lanka. There has been in some quarters considerable misunderstanding about the nature of the Armed Forces and their relationship to the Sri Lankan State and to the Sri Lankan community.

European history

European history has been dominated during extensive periods by conflicts among nations. During these epochs high profile military leaders have dominated the political stage. Indeed it would not be an exaggeration to say that European history during these periods has revolved around personalities like Napoleon and across the water the Duke of Wellington, Bismark of Germany and Garribaldi of Italy. It is these personalities that have moulded the basic forces of European history at that time.

Professor Harold Laski, in his classic work, The Grammar of Politics, describes the Armed Forces of the state as the most visible expression of the coercive authority of the State. Prof A. V. Dicey, in his famous Vinerian lectures delivered at the University of Oxford, defines the relationship between the Armed Forces and the state in strikingly similar terms.

I want to emphasize to you that the Sri Lankan situation is fundamentally different. What the Armed Forces were doing during the conflict was not an engagement against a foreign force. It was not an adventure of conquest. It had an entirely different objective. That objective was to release an oppressed people from the thraldom of terror and make it possible for them to lead a life that was built on dignity and freedom. That was the role and objective of the Armed Forces. People who could not even think of making decisions for themselves, or making choices in a spirit of spontaneity, and were subjugated and intimidated, these are the people to whom the army brought relief during that turbulent period in the contemporary history of our country.

What are the manifestations of this? I recall a visit to Nagadeepa, the historic Buddhist temple situated in the North, and I recall the chief priest of that temple telling me "Minister, I want to tell you that, at the height of the conflict, when there was so much violence, no harm came to us at any time".

The Army and the Navy at that time provided the monks in that temple with every meal and he told me that the Army and the Navy looked after the monks in the temple just as they would look after their own parents. That was the spirit of empathy and compassion which marked the activities of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces during that operation.

In order to assess critically the validity of some of the criticisms that are heard, let us look at the factual context. The situation in Nandikadal in the closing stages of the war represented the most serious hostage situation in modern military history, in terms of numbers 300,000 civilians trapped on a narrow strip of land between the lagoon and the sea, the LTTE using these civilians as human shields, compelling them to accompany the LTTE from place to place to dig trenches and to do other work for them.

The government of Sri Lanka announced that they are welcome in the government controlled areas where food, medical facilities and freedom awaited them. The film that we were just shown provides visual evidence of the measures that were adopted by the LTTE to prevent these people from exercising their freedom of choice and having access to government controlled areas. Indeed the LTTE opened fire and killed many of them. There are also very moving photographs that I myself have seen of members of the army helping the aged, the sick and the children to cross the waters of the lagoon. They do not epitomize aggression of the Armed Forces. On the contrary, the Armed Forces were performing a very unconventional and unorthodox role, because of the nature of the operation and its inherent objectives.

United Nations system

There is also misinformed criticism regarding the no fire zones. Not only Sri Lankan government records, but contemporary records of the United Nations system demonstrate beyond any shadow of doubt what really happened in that situation. The LTTE made systematic and persistent use of the no fire zones to come into these areas and with the full knowledge and assurance that the Armed Forces will not open fire, they considered themselves free to engage in their activities, making use of that situation to fire at government troops. This is documented in reports which emanate from sources other than the government of Sri Lanka.

Economic renaissance

In all these situations the course of action that was adopted by the army gave pride of place to humanitarian considerations. Indeed, the military operation could have ended considerably earlier with far less loss of life and limb to members of the Armed Forces. But a deliberate decision was made by his the President and Gotabhaya Rajapaksa not to do that. That is the true situation on the ground which has been grossly misrepresented by some of the criticism which has emanated from certain parties. That is how the Armed Forces behaved during the conflict.

Both Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and Lieutenant General Jagath Jayasuriya spoke of the continuing contribution of the Armed Forces to nation building, which is no less significant than the unique role they played in bringing peace and stability to our land. Let us consider what the Armed Forces have done after the conflict was over, that is after May 2009.

The Defence Secretary referred in some detail to the very difficult and hard work that was done by the army with regard to the clearing of mines. This was an incredibly complex operation. Several months ago there was a situation in which a French bomb disposal expert was blown up while engaged in demining operations. In Puthukudrrippu and Merintongpaththu, those are some of the areas that the LTTE occupied in the closing stages of the war - the work is still not 100 percent complete.

It is the mining which had been done in those parts of the country which created considerable delays with regard to the resettlement of internally displaced persons. And as Secretary Rajapaksa pointed out, starting with 296,000 people, it is now down to almost nothing and he said by the middle of this month the resettlement of the IDPs would be completed. So demining was one of the principal humanitarian activities embarked upon by the Army after the conclusion of hostilities. Then housing: the whole idea is to make it possible for people who have suffered so much agony and pain during three decades to begin a new life with confidence in the future.

In order to do that you have to provide them with the basic necessities of living. And among them obviously is shelter. So the government of Sri Lanka very rightly placed a very sharp emphasis on housing.

The army played a significant role in the construction of houses by providing, as we were told by the Defence Secretary, both engineering expertise and manpower.

Today we see an economic renaissance in the Northern part of Sri Lanka. One of the principal reasons for this has been the focus on development of infrastructure. No government in Sri Lanka's history has undertaken so much expenditure on the construction of highways and railroads systems. This could not have been achieved without the active contribution of the Armed Forces.

They played not just a useful, but indeed an indispensable role with regard to the construction and improvement of infrastructure in that part of the country, which substantially accounts for the unique economic progress which has been achieved in the Northern Province within a remarkably brief time span.

The other aspect of it is the disarming of violent groups. That is an absolute necessity to provide a backdrop for many other things which need to be done as a matter of priority in the post conflict situation.

For example, how can you move towards the conduct of elections in an atmosphere that is bereft of duress if you still have armed groups operating in the areas where elections are to be held? Who can actually do the disarming? The Armed Forces have to necessarily perform that function.

These are some of the activities that the Armed Forces have been engaged in since the end of the conflict, and without their vigorous involvement, it would have been quite impossible to achieve the degree of success which has been accomplished on the ground during the last three years.

Foreign observers

I want to make a comment on the perception in some quarters which has been articulated persistently abroad with regard to the alleged militarization of the Northern Province. Again it is very important to understand the historical context and the cultural underpinnings of that situation. Every country has a culture of its own, a social history, traditions and values. These cannot be regarded as transferable across nations and cultures.

It is a fact of life which we all recognize that at the height of the conflict the Armed Forces were called upon to perform functions that an army would generally not undertake. For example, the retail trade; they had to do that, not through choice but through necessity.

To be continued