Cursory Comments No. 14

WAPS-3: The Role of Norway

by Victor Gunasekara

This is the third Cursory Comment on the Papers presented at the WAPS Conference (Oslo, August 04). CC12 considered the Paper presented by HLD Mahindapala, CC13 considered the Paper by Paul Harris. This Essay considers the Paper by Susantha Goonetilake.

This Essay deals with the Paper presented by Susantha Goonetilake [hereafter referred to as SG or as the Presenter] to the WAPS Conference on "Roadmaps to Peace in Sri Lanka". The version of the Paper contained in the Conference website consists of a series of slides containing text as well as pictures. The presentation may have consisted of a Powerpoint slide show. Such presentations are usually accompanied by a commentary from the presenter and if this was so this commentary is not given. However the text portion of the presentation is sufficiently large (about 5000 words) so as to get a good idea of the line of the presentation. The textual part of the presentation is reproduced in the Appendix to this Essay which could serve as a reference point to my comments.[1]

The Presentation is entitled "Norway, a 25 Year Odyssey" so it was concerned with the involvement of Norway in the affairs of Sri Lanka. This was a very pertinent subject to be considered in a Conference held in Oslo and should have been one of the key papers. It is therefore something of a disappointment that this important subject had not been given an adequate treatment. If it had been a reasoned argument, like what H.L.D. Mahindapala gave in his address, it could have considered all the political, legal, economic, and other ramifications of Norway's involvement. Instead the Conference was left with a few impressionistic glimpses of Norway's involvement with their real serious implications neglected. My comments will of course have to refer to the presentation as could be inferred from the document given in the website.

The Analysis of the Presentation
As the original presentation is deficient in structure I have divided it into five sections for purposes of comment identified from [A] to [E] in the Appendix, which contains the text of the Presentation. Section [A] which could be taken as a general introduction and a statement of the fundamental approach contains several wrong views which I have questioned in this Essay. Section [B], to which the bulk of the Presentation is devoted, lists many instances of direct Norwegian interference in SL affairs. Most of these are little more than Newspaper headlines taken from Sri Lankan newspapers, Reports of the Jaffna University teachers, and the reporting of Walter Jayawardene of Los Angeles. Section [C] consists of an account of the activity of NGOs sponsored by Norway concentrating mainly on International Alert, the National Peace Council and a person called Podi Nilame.. Section [D] ("Norway above All") contains many relevant aspects relating to Norway, but it is unfortunately too brief. The last section [E] is a defence of SL against some Norwegian accusations and assumptions, and contains some positions which I question..

I will be commenting on each of these in the sub-sections in this Essay. I shall also consider, very briefly, a couple of questions relating to Norway's intervention which one would expect to have been asked, and which were not. Some tentative answers to these questions are also considered.

A Fundamental Misunderstanding
The subtitle to SG's presentation ("From Sympathizer to Colonial Intruder") seems to suggest that there has been a change in Norway's role. I do not see any such change. Norway has always been the sympathizer, not of Sri Lanka, but of the LTTE. The designation of Norway as a 'Colonial Intruder' is also questionable. In a typical colonial intrusion the colonial power imposes its will on the colonized people without their consent. It is in fact a form of imperial conquest. But in Norway's case it is the Sri Lankan Governments that have sought Norway's intervention. Thus Norway is technically an ally of the SL Government not a colonial imposition. This misunderstanding of Norway's role is a fundamental weakness of this presentation.

This misunderstanding leads to several curiosities in the presentation. Early in the presentation there are several slides of large numbers of Sri Lankans protesting against the Norwegians in front of their embassy in Colombo and elsewhere. These are said to be the greatest demonstrations against Norway anywhere. But the Norwegians could well ask: "Why are these people demonstrating against us. Should they not be demonstrating against their Government? We are there simply because their Government wants us there and if we are asked to go we will go." A true colonial intruder cannot and will not say this. There is no way this argument can be refuted. Both the coalitions that have ruled SL since the MOU [2] have sought the intervention of Norway. Norway is thus no 'colonial intruder' in the proper sense of this term. This kind of terminology seeks to deflect criticism from the SL political parties on which it should rest to outsiders. It would also confirm the foreign view that Sri Lankans do not know what they are doing. They are barking up the wrong tree - the real villains are within, not outside.

"Participant Observation"
The Presenter says that he saw the alleged transition in Norway from sympathy to colonialism through "participant observation", i.e. first-hand knowledge. He says that in the late 70s and early 80s he "interacted closely with Norwegian academics". It is not stated in what academic discipline this interaction took place. Then SG claims that subsequently Norway adopted the stance of "academic colonialism". I find it difficult to understand what is meant by the latter term. Perhaps SG refers to the policy of many Western academic institutions of funding Sri Lankan academics who toe the Western line on Sri Lanka which they want to propagate. This is simply the buying of academic mercenaries (a commercial transaction) and cannot be termed academic "colonialism".

Of course the existence of Sri Lankan academic mercenaries in Western institutions is well known. These academics dabble in subjects like history, politics, sociology, anthropology, religion, conflict studies and several other Mickey-mouse subjects. These are soft-core subjects in which anybody with some flair for jargon can soon become an expert. Their opinions on these subjects are worth little as what they say are usually designed to please those who give them their salaries or research grants.[3] In the course of his presentation SG gives several examples of "academics" whom the Norwegians have bought over. There is no academic colonialism here as these people are not academics at all in any real sense!

There are no examples given of how Norway before the transition referred to acted in a sympathetic way to SL. There is a reference to Norway fulfilling the EU requirement of giving 1 percent of its GDP as "foreign aid". How much of this came in SL's way is not stated. Nor is it stated how much of this aid was given to SL academics to collaborate with their Norwegian counterparts, the very mercenary relationship we have alluded to! This attitude perpetuates the view that foreign aid has been a blessing whereas it has been a serious drawback perpetuating an attitude of mendicancy in the Government and people of Sri Lanka.

Most of the presentation relates to examples of Norwegian actions after it became a "colonial intruder". These are not personal "participant observations" on the part of the presenter but news reports stemming from a wide variety of sources. For the most part only headlines are given (or photographs where a visual representation is required).

Norwegian Direct Interference

Section B (marked in the Appendix) seems to be the core of the presentation and gives over 40 instances of direct interference by Norway. While these are widely known in Sri Lanka it is well that they were reiterated in Norway. I do not know how the Norwegian press had covered their country's involvement in SL. If they had defended the Norwegian intervention in Sri Lanka then this section of the presentation would have provided a necessary corrective. But whether it would have any effect is still to be seen. The instances of interference given are not integrated into an overall argument underlying the presentation. The other papers at the Conference also gave examples of Norway's interference and partiality in their relations with SL.

There is however a fundamental dilemma relating to Norway's interference as given in this section. This is the same problem as that relating to the description of Norway as a colonial intruder which is the basic theme underlying the whole presentation. Most of the interventions of Norway have been condoned, or at least not objected to, by the Government of SL. Thus it is claimed that the Cease-Fire agreement was drafted by the Norwegians and brought to the PM Ramil Wickremesinghe to sign. But why did Ranil W. sign it if he did not agree with what the Norwegians had drafted? And again it is claimed that President Chandrika Kumaratunga has criticized the Nordic truce monitors for being "completely unsatisfactory and biased". If so why then does CBK continue to tolerate them as monitors, and even request their return when they distanced themselves when the Peace Process stalled? These issues raise questions on the "intervention" by the Norwegians. The fundamental question is: If the intervention of the intervener is accepted by the party subjected to the interventions (and who may be suffering from the intervention) then where does the blame for the intervention lie, with the intervener or the intervened?

Of course the above does not apply to the support which Norway has given to the terrorists. These include the training of terrorists, the supply of sophisticated equipment which enhance their military capability, the hosting of many terrorists in Norway, etc. many of which are documented in this section of SG's presentation. The Norwegian response to this is most likely that they can justify it under current international practice of supporting a group of "oppressed people" or "freedom fighters" from their "oppressors". The refutation of this argument must be an essential part in evaluating the instances of Norwegian interference given. This should not be the task of this presentation alone but of all the papers given in the Conference. But it must be an important part of a paper dealing with Norway's interventions in Sri Lanka. The Norwegian arguments for their intervention should have been stated and refuted for the presentation to gain in credibility.

There is some effort devoted to exposing the "double speak" of Norweigian officials and politicians like Westborg, Helgesen, Solheim etc. But the short snippets given is not adequate to constitute a refutation. What we need also to ask is why these duplicitous foreign agents of the terrorists are tolerated in Sri Lanka by a sovereign Sri Lankan government.

The Support of NGOs

Section [C] of the presentation highlights the Norwegian supported NGOs and fifth columnists in Sri Lanka. It refers to "foreign funded" NGOs but any NGO of concern is foreign funded. In the event only three parties are referred to by name, these being International Alert (IA), the National Peace Council (NPC) and Podi Nilame.

My view is that all NGOs should be barred from Sri Lanka and other third-world countries.. If anyone wants to provide aid to Sri Lanka this aid should be provided through accountable organizations set up by the Government. If this were to happen one can be sure that these NGO will simply vanish. This alone shows that they are not really interested in helping the needy, but to propagate their own reach and power.

A few words may be be said about the three parties referred to in the presentation.

International Alert (IA)

IA first exhibited an interest in the SL conflict in the early 80s. The first SL expatriate body to take issue with IA was the Queensland Association for Sri Lankan Unity (QASLU)[4], the first Australian expatriate body to rise to the defence of Sri Lanka. At the time the Australian Senator Missen was a prominent person in IA. QASLU refuted the claims of IA and engaged in a dialogue with Senator Missen (now deceased) on the subject. The result was that IA became silent on SL for some time. It appears that IA again reared its head in Norway this time under the charge of a Sri Lankan mercenary, probably a Jesuhela. Such mercenaries are available in plenty if the money is forthcoming. Their caliber is much wanting but this does not matter for the kind of lies that they are peddling.

I feel that much attention should not be paid to IA. It was set up to compete with Amnesty International and tap into the vast funds that the Amnesty International is receiving. But this has failed, and IA remains a relatively poor NGO dealing with "basket cases" in the human rights field. To have given prominence to IA in the WAPS conference may not have been necessary and perhaps ill-advised. It is in fact like giving prominence to Norway...

National Peace Council (NPC)

This seems to be another of those peacenik organizations set up to ensure that the partition of Sri Lanka into Helabima and Eelaam is carried out without too much cost to the terrorists. Unfortunately the only thing that seems to proliferate in Sri Lanka are Peace organizations, but what the country experiences is not genuine peace but suspended fear of terrorism and loss of sovereignty.

It would appear that the NPC is conducting country-wide campaigns to promote the Peace Process. The sad thing is that there is large response to the peace propaganda of groups like NPC. This is a reflection of the extent to which the neo-Sinhala ideology has spread amongst modern-day Sinhalas. What we need is some positive actions to counter the propaganda of groups like the NPC. This cannot be done unless the Peace Process is rejected.

Podi Nilame

This is the first timeI heard of this individual. He seems to be a particularly nasty example of SL mercenaries hired by the NGOs. From his name he appears to be a Kandyan. Ever since Konappu Bandara there has been a long line of traitors in the Udarata. So it is not surprising that people like Podi Nilame are carrying their message to Norway and other places. We can only be thankful that we have only a Podi Nilame and not a Loku Nilame!

The Concluding Sections
Section [D] to which the title "Norway above all"[5] has been given is one which is quite relevant in examining Norway's credentials to interfere with Sri Lanka. It lists some of the negativities that have come to be associated with Norway. SG has listed the discrimination against the Lapplanders (whose territory had been seized by the white intruders), the disabilities placed against other religions than the established Lutheran Church, the collaboration with the Nazis and acceptance of their theories, etc. Other factors could also have been adduced such as the relentless slaughter of whales which has been given up many other humane countries and which is prohibited by international covenants. The Lutheran imperative too could have been explored more. Martin Luther was the most racist of the Protestants and one calling for uncompromising evangelization.

Norway's justification for supporting the Tamil terrorists is that they are discriminated on racial and religious grounds in Sri Lanka. But if it is shown that this is precisely what Norway is doing within their own country this claim could be refuted. That is why I feel that more research should have gone into this aspect, and this section given greater prominence than in this presentation. However the presenter must be commended for including it.

The final section [E] labeled by the presenter "At Ground Level" refers to the situation in the "South". There are a number of questionable statements made here. I shall comment only on a few of these:

"Most Sinhalese and Tamils today have no rancor". The tacit assumption here is that the conflict in Sri Lanka is an ethnic problem which is an assumption underlying the whole WAPS conference. The Conflict however is not between these two ethnic groups, but between those who are "eelamized" and those who have been "helanized".[6] These are two ideological positions (both of which stem from the same kind of racial thinking) has been the real basis of the conflict.

"2,500 Years, 500 Years of Resistance." There was some resistance in the early period of the Portuguese invasion, particularly by Rajasinghe of Sitawaka. But there were also a large number of collaborators and traitors like Don Juan Pandar (Dharmapala) and Don Juan of Austria (Konappu Bandara). If we take the balance between resistors and collaborators in the period since probably the latter are in a majority. After the Cultural Revolution of 1956, which enthroned the Hela ideology, both the main ruling coalitions which have alternated in power have been more on the "treacherous" side than on the "patriotic" one.

There seems to be a quiet acceptance of the cleansing of Sinhalas and Muslims from the "North" (Jaffna peninsula). This seems to be adduced as a reason why there is less of a racial conflict now. But if Sri Lanka is to aim to be a "secure, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural democratic society" (SG) then the ethnic cleansing of the North that has taken place cannot be allowed to stand.

"Sri Lanka has been made to fail". I do not agree with this. The West did not want Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand or China to succeed. But they have made much success to the extent that they are not fatally dependent on foreign aid as Sri Lanka still is. This is ironical as SL was economically ahead of all these countries at independence. The fact that SL has progressed backwards towards the bottom of the heap is in my analysis due to the adoption of the neo-Sinhala mentality and turning their back on classical Lankan values.

"We can still be friends. " Even if Norway were to proffer friendship Sri Lanka should spurn it. By its support of terrorism and acts inimical to Sri Lanka's vital interests, Norway has gone beyond the pale. To accept so-called friendship of Norway is confirmation of SL's cowardice and lack of respect to its own values.

The Unasked Questions
There are certain questions relating to Norway's intervention in the Sri Lankan Conflict that have not been asked and not been answered in this presentation. Why did Norway intervene in the Sri Lankan dispute in the first place? Having intervened why did it not take a neutral stance as an impartial umpire? If it did decide to support a particular side why did it chose the Tamil separatists instead of the SL Government and the broad mass of the Sri Lankan people? Answers to such questions must be sought.

There is nothing in the history of both Sri Lanka and Norway which would make these countries located almost at opposite points on the globe to have any interaction with each other. Nor was Norway acting on the basis of any kind of international authority as for example whose countries that have supplied troops to operate in unknown places on the basis of UN resolutions. Several answers have been advanced to these questions, some fanciful and others not so. We may examine some of them.

A. Norway has virtually made no contribution to European civilization so it is trying to establish some kind of reputation for itself. It has sought out Sri Lanka because this is the weakest of countries with an internal conflict so that Norway felt that it a good candidate for it to throw its weight about.

B. Norway missed out in the European grab for colonies, so it is now trying to establish a neo-colonial empire of its own. This theory tallies with the 'Colonial Intruder' hypothesis underlying this presentation.

C. Norway has seen some resemblance between the Vikings of old who were the terrorists of their day, and the LTTE who are the pioneering terrorists of the modern day. Something of the Viking yearning for terrorism seems to linger still in the Norwegian gene, but since Norway is too cowardly to indulge in this yearning directly it has taken on itself to provide shelter to a number of terrorist groups of whom the LTTE occupy pride of place.

D. Norway has a large number of Tamil asylum seekers who can only be sent back if Norway succeeds in securing de jure status to the Eelaam region of Sri Lanka and make it into an independent and sovereign state.

E. Racism is part of the Lutheran religion and this gives them a natural sympathy for the LTTE racists.

F. The Norwegian Christian evangelical drive makes the Christian LTTE a natural ally who can be used to promote Christianization of the whole of Sri Lanka.

Several other theories are possible Of the theories given above I tend to favour E and F. The Christian factor is the main explanation for Norwegian actions in Sri Lanka. Yet it is Christian factor that was most neglected in the WAPS conference..

Conclusions on the Presentation
This presentation had both positive and negative aspects. The positive aspects are that it exposed Norwegian interference ([B]) and the support of quisling [7] NGOs ([C]) There was also a good attempt to expose the skeletons in the Norwegian cupboard ([D]). These aspects are of course subject to the comments I have made. But on the whole it was useful to present these on Norwegian soil.

The central failing in the paper was identified by me in my critical comments on sections [A] and [E]. This is that it lacked a theoretical framework in terms of which Norwegian interference could be understood. Then there is the neglect of the "unasked questions" I have mentioned. Of course I do not expect that a definitive answer to these unasked questions but at least they should not have been shirked. And as stated the Christian dimensions of Norway's role and the influence of its Lutheran ideology are neglected aspects in this presentation of Norway's role in Sri Lanka.

[1] The Acrobat PDF format of the presentation makes it difficult to follow the argument as a text document. Hopefully the text version given in the Appendix will make it easier to follow the argument of the presentation and relate it to my comments..

[2] MOU refers to the Memorandum of Understanding between the LTTE and the SL Government. Originally signed by the Ranil W Government it has been accepted by the Chandrika K Government as well. According to SG Norway played a crucial part in drafting this document. On the MOU see my article written at the time "Surrender to Terrorism in Sri Lanka" in the ACSLU webpage.

[3] A good example of this is the Seminar on Sri Lanka held last year at the University of Bath, U.K, organized by Deegalle Mahinda. I had perused some of the papers presented there and felt that were not even worth responding to.

[4] QASLU was formed a few years after outbreak of the insurgency by a group of SL expatriates in Brisbane (Australia) to counter the activities of the international Tamil separatist lobby which was strongly active in that part of Australia. QASLU was active at least until the intervention of Rajiv Gandhi. Disappointment at the SL: Government's response to this caused many of its founders to drift away. Finally the organization was disbanded even though a small rump tried to carry on its name as some kind of support group for the treacherous SL governments.

[5] I do not know if this is the national motto of Norway. It seems to be based on "Deutschland über Alles", but while Germany may have some credibility to make such a claim Norway has none!

[6] I have explained the processes of 'helanization' and 'eelamization' in several articles some included in the Cursory Comments series. My theory in this respect has not been widely accepted because the neo-Sinhalas of today refuse to face the truth. However my paradigm relating to this has to be further developed.

[7] One of the few contributions of Norway to the English language is the word 'quisling'. This refers to a puppet set up in a dependent country by an external power. It is derived from Vidkun Quisling who served as the Norwegian puppet of the Nazis. Today Norway is setting up 'quislings' of its own in other countries, and Sri Lanka is the one most "favoured"!



Please note that CCs circulated contain several typing errors as they are not proof-read. However some of these errors will be corrected (and the text somewhat expanded) when they are posted on the ACSLU webpage. Comments on any remaining errors, or any other subject, are welcome.

I may issue a final Critical Comment on the WAPS Conference which will look at three minor papers and also offer a general evaluation of the Conference as a whole.



This Appendix reproduces the the textual part of the presentation of SG. I have divided it into five sections denoted from [A] to [E] (indicated in red). This is for convenience of placing my comments in context. They are not found in the original document.

Norway, a 25 Year Odyssey
From Sympathizer to Colonial Intruder
Susantha Goonatilake Ph D (Sansadaya- Forum)

[A] Introduction

Let us Pose the Question: Is there a role for Norway in building a secure, democratic, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural Sri Lankan society? Let the search begin with Norway. Norwegians are rightly proud of their history. 17th May: Norwegian National Day. They even go to extra extents in their patriotism. The film "What's New, Pussycat" was banned in Norway in banned in Norway in 1965 because of a scene where Peter Sellers tries to commit suicide by burning himself wrapped in a Norwegian flag.

But Norwegians directly and indirectly are seen as burning Sri Lanka. And Sri Lankans have organized hugely against Norwegian interference. First major demonstration against Norway Tamil protests. Hundreds of Tamil activists carry body of a politician slain by LTTE to the Colombo Norwegian embassy to protest Norway' s pro LTTE partiality 2004 (AFP)

Largest ever demonstrations in Sri Lanka's 2,500 year history? Largest ever demonstrations against Norway in Norway's history? Massive Sri Lanka People Power Protest against Norway, 50,000 marching to Norwegian Embassy in Colombo. Storming the Bastille? 50,000 protestors in front of Norwegian Embassy in Colombo carrying black flags. Police guard Norway embassy in Colombo.

Norway is the new "Ugly American". Norway's image in Sri Lanka, except for those elements controlled by Norwegian money in the form of both journalists and NGOs funded by it, has declined to an unprecedented level. It is worse than the image India had after its brief incursion into the country in the late 1980s. But Norway's self image is that of a sensitive nation, sympathetic to developing countries devoting over 1% of its oil generated GNP to aid.

Exercise In Participant Observation. The present paper traces this shift of Norway to colonial intruder, partly through an exercise in participant observation. In late 1970s and early 1980s, the author interacted closely with Norwegian academics to attempt equal academic partnerships. In the 1970s I attempted to build a non-colonial academic situation in Sri Lanka. I had earlier refused, as one sided, many offers of collaborative research with the West. By the late '70s the critique of academic colonialism, of which I was a pioneer, was being heard in mainland Europe Soon, I found European collaborators willing to work under our guidance One offer was from within the University of Trondheim, Norway. Collaboration was two fold: I suggested to sympathetic Norwegians how to attempt real academic equality I helped establish collaborative research between Norway and Sri Lankan universities on a fully transparent, equal basis. But as we have seen Norway is perceived today to have drastically changed its relations. There are reasons for this

Norwegian Subversion. Norway has become a "subverter" in 2 ways Norwegian subversion has occurred directly through attempted control of Lankan government structures Norwegian subversion has occurred through unrepresentative NGOs they fund & sponsor.

[B] Direct Interference
Suspension of Peace Process. Norwegian Deputy Prime Minister Vidar Helgesen suspends Sri Lanka peace drive claiming PM and President at logger heads (Friday, 14-Nov-2003) Sri Lankan President accuses Prime Minster of violating the Constitution by showing her a landmark truce only after the Tamil rebels' leader had signed it. February 22, Indo-Asian News Service 2002

Ceasefire Agreement. Eric Solheim together with the Norwegian Foreign Ministry drafted and crafted the Ceasefire Agreement along with the [LTTE's] Balasingham and had it signed by Prabhakaran without the concurrence of the Executive Head of State. (Island"The Norwegians exposed")

Helgesen above Sri Lanka President. Q [to Helgesen]: The President [Head of State] has said that she was not shown the Memorandum of Understanding [between LTTE and the Prime Minister] until the last minute. Is not the responsibility of the Norwegian Government to inform both the President and the Prime Minister at the same time? A: When the Prime Minister asks Norway to inform the President we will do that. (Helgesen in Sunday Island, March 17, 2002)

Viking rule? asks Economist. "But nor, curiously, was [Prime Minister] Mr. Wickremesinghe consulted about the wording of the memorandum. It appears to have been composed by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry after discussions with the Tigers. The Tigers' leader, Prabhakaran, signed the memorandum... It was then brought to Colombo for Mr. Wickremesinghe's signature". (The Economist March 2, 2002)

Pro- LTTE Norwegians. The LTTE was allowed to have no go areas whereas the 'cleared areas' under government control were opened to LTTE operatives to indulge not really in political work but in all manner of other subversive activity. They were in fact allowed to violate the Ceasefire Agreement with impunity. To make this possible the pro-LTTE Norwegians brought in Ceasefire monitors from Nordic countries. They have been totally partial towards the LTTE. (Features Island "The Norwegians exposed")

The UNF Government Swore LTTE Ban Would not be Lifted. But Q [to Helgesen]: Is there a condition that the ban on the LTTE should be lifted if they were to attend the talks? A: It is important that when you bring parties to the negotiating table, they have the feeling of being treated equally. .. (Helgesen in Sunday Island, March 17, 2002). Soon thereafter Tiger ban was lifted

Norwegians: Flag Carriers for the LTTE . "Norwegians set about 'facilitating'as they called it, the peace process, was without precedent. They would never have taken the liberties they took with Sri Lanka with any other country. .They were the flag carriers for the LTTE in Europe and in Geneva at the Human Rights Commission. (Island "The Norwegians exposed")

Norway trains LTTE in Malaysian island Norwegians had allowed the LTTE to establish their international communication headquarters in Norway. It was also well known that they were major financiers of the LTTE and last but not least that they provided training in some remote Malaysian island to the LTTE in 1993, 1994 and 1995 (Features Island "The Norwegians exposed")

Norway Smuggles Secret Equipment for LTTE . Norwegian Government's smuggling of highly sophisticated radio equipment for LTTE under cover of diplomatic privilege violates Vienna Convention. The Norwegian Government's involvement, in clandestinely importing, radio equipment implies future attacks could be coordinated more efficiently and effectively. This is a piece of electronic equipment with the highest available degree of security from interception. The Sri Lankan Government has no such sophisticated radio equipment.

LTTE, NORAD and Red Barna. Norwegians had for years supported the LTTE within this country through NORAD and Red Barna. They planted a UNDP Resident Representative who was a former Red Barnaman. He was wholly supportive of the LTTE in the mid 1990s. (Features Island"The Norwegians exposed")

Ambassador Westborg. As head of Red Barna former Norwegian Ambassador Westborg transported thousands of estate Tamils to the jungles of the Vanni to illegally change the ethnic composition. They later became soldiers of the last stronghold of Prabhakaran. Westborgwas personally involved in the import of radio equipment.

Norway High- handed, Arrogant, Partial, Prejudiced . The Norwegian sponsored SLMM have not only been high-handed, arrogant, partial, prejudiced and haughty but imperious, over bearing and dictatorial and have also been dishonest. they have no credibility whatsoever. (Features Island "The Norwegians exposed")

Tigers Appreciate Norway. The Tigers triumphantly issued two photographs of their very first sea craft carrying their troops from Mullaithivuin Wannito Vakaraiin Eastern Province and appreciated the services rendered to them by the Norway controlled Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission for obtaining the permanent sea passage .(Walter Jayawardhana reporting from Los Angeles)

Norway Trained Sea Tigers. Norway trained Sea Tigers in the seas of Thailand to attack Sri Lanka Navy. (IPS News Service November 12, 2003)

Norway Worked for Separatism . The Norwegians have surreptitiously worked assiduously towards the creation of a separate Tamil State in Sri Lanka. (Features Island"The Norwegians exposed")

Ask LTTE About Separatism . Q [to Helgesen]: The LTTE always said that they did not want any other settlement other than a separate state. Have they changed their mind now? A: You have to ask that from them. (Helgesenin Sunday Island, March 17, 2002)

First Step Towards Separatism The implications of the LTTE's[ISGA] proposals are that they are clearly the first step towards the creation of a separate sovereign territorial entity in Sri Lanka. (The Hindustan Times Novembe r 7 2003)

Norway for Separate LTTE Navy. Maj. Gen. (retd) Teleffsen proposed on April 3, this year, that the Sri Lanka Navy should recognize LTTE's Sea Tigers as "a de facto Naval Unit and the LTTE should be excluded from the law concerning limitations on outboard motors horsepower. (Situation Report -April 20)

Norway Confines Sri Lankan Navy. In April 24, 2002, Maj. Gen. (retd) Teleffsen sought to confine the Sri Lanka Navy's exercises, to specified areas at sea. He had also marked out in a map the areas in the country's western and eastern seas to be handed out to the LTTE for "training and live firing."

Norway Leaked Information to LTTE . Norwegian Head of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission , Tellefsen"leaked information to the LTTE concerning a navy operation to track down a suspected LTTE ship smuggling arms into Sri Lanka." (Sri Lanka President & Head of armed forces)

Sri Lanka navy accuses Norway . Norwegian ceasefire monitor: "persona-non grata" . President, Chandrika Kumaratunga, asked the then government to declare as "persona-non grata", the Norwegian ceasefire monitor, who allegedly leaked vital military information to the LTTE.

Norway Foreign Minister warns Sri Lankan President The English language Norway Post said, "According to Aftenposten, Foreign Minister Petersen warns the Sri Lankan President that her continuous interference in the peace process could have consequences both for the peace process and for Norway's role in the process."

See No Evil. Q [to Helgesen]: There are reports that the LTTE are bringing arms including long range missiles. .. Have you had a chance to talk to the LTTE about this? A: No. ... (Helgesen in Sunday Island, March 17, 2002)

Norway "completely unsatisfactory and biased" . The Sri Lankan President, Chandrika Kumaratunga, has criticized the Nordic truce monitors for a "completely unsatisfactory and biased" report on the recent sinking of a Chinese trawler by Tigers. [the Nordic SLMM said that the attack was not carried out by the LTTE or the Government, but by some other "unidentified armed elements", a clear fabrication. (The Hindu of 09/04/ 2003)

No guarantee. Q [to Helgesen]: There is a general feeling among the people that the LTTE will break the cease-fire. Can you give a guarantee that they would not do that? A: I cannot. ... (Helgesen in Sunday Island, March 17, 2002)

[LTTE Killings]. While European Union Removes LTTE From Their Terrorist List The Group Continues To Kill Their Tamil Political Rivals . (Walter Jayawardhana Reporting From Los Angeles) Many Tamils and Sinhalese killed by LTTE after ceasefire Killings continued even last week. The European Union severely condemned LTTE on 15 August 2004 for continuing to engage in political killings, abductions and recruitment of children for its ranks (16 August 2004 Daily News)

Miserably Failed And Biased. Norway Backed Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission Has Miserably Failed And Biased . Says Leading Tamils Human Rights Group, UTHR

Norway Rewarding LTTE Tyranny. [Norwegians] Rewarding LTTE Tyranny: Undermining The Democratic Potential For Peace (University Teachers for Human Rights, Special Report No: 17 7th October 2003)

Norwegian "Human Rights". Prabhakaran has the power to change verdicts of the "Eelam Courts", intervene in the judicial process and even change the law itself as the need arises (S. Pararajasingham, legal advisor to the LTTE in an interview with the BBC's Sinhala language service)

Stop LTTE Atrocities Against Unarmed Civilians! Reports from Trincomalee said that public and private transport services remained crippled and all shops were kept closed when more than five thousand Tamils, Sinhalese and Muslims staged a demonstration demanding the intervention of the Norway backed Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission to stop LTTE atrocities against unarmed civilians (Walter Jayawardhana reporting from Los Angeles )

Tamil Political Parties Demonstrate. Frustrated by the Pro-LTTE Stance of the Norway Backed SLMM, Tamil Political Parties Demonstrate against Norway with the Corpse of a Victim (By Walter Jayawardhan a Reporting From Los Angeles)

Tamil Residents Flee. Tamil residents flee to save their children. Tigers rounding up youth in NE for forcible conscription (Island Thursday, January 31, 2002)

Students Demonstrate Against Child Abductions. Students of Valaichenai Hindu school demonstrate against child abductions (Walter Jayawardhana reporting from Los Angeles)

Norway: LTTE child recruiting not true. Q [to Helgesen]: There was also a report from Amnesty International that the LTTE are recruiting child soldiers. A: They [the LTTE ] are telling us that it is not true.(Helgesenin Sunday Island, March 17, 2002)

Tigers install radar system. Because of conditions under Norwegian ceasefire, the LTTE had installed a radar system and a satellite telephone centre in the sea coast (Daily Mirror16th August 2004 )

Eric Solheim: Honest Negotiator? Solheim admitted that his party Sosialistik Venstreparti inflates the number of its members, so as to get extra subsidies from the government. This "honest"act in Sri Lanka will bring in punishment, including dismissal.

Eric Solheim: Double Speak (1). Solheim supported the bombing of Serbia by NATO to eliminate Slobodan Milosevic -guilty, among others, of ethnic cleansing. But Milosevic's cruelties do not match those of Prabhakaran. No attacks on ancient religious institutions, no terrorist bombings like those of the Central Bank, no recruitment of child soldiers and no use of suicide bombers. Solheim embraces Prabhakaranwhile he wants the elimination of Milosevic.

Eric Solheim: Double Speak (2). Solheim has publicly called Kissinger a terrorist for his actions in Chile and Vietnam. He says Kissinger should be charged as a war criminal. But Kissinger's role in Chile led to the death of only a few in comparison with the larger number of deaths due to Prabhakaran. Prabhakaran is guilty of far more horrendous crimes than Pinochet's Chile.

Eric Solheim: Double Speak (3). Solheim should be suing the LTTE for two easily provable crimes against humanity. They are the ethnic cleansing of Jaffna of all Muslims and Sinhalese and the killing of 600 policemen who surrendered to them as well as the killing of all the armed personnel at Mullativu. Solheimis said to be concerned about the spread of a racist party in Norway and wants to isolate it. But in Sri Lanka he befriends the most racist party, the LTTE.

Eric Solheim: Double Speak (4). Solheim bemoans that membership of political parties is coming down in Norway and so bad for democracy. But in Sri Lanka Norway supports unrepresentative NGOs to go against truth & popular will. This is a sneaky attack against truth and democracy. Democracy is only for Norwegians. Only fiction for Sri Lankans.

Indirect Intrusion Means. If the above are the direct means of Norwegian intrusion through her government, what are the indirect means They brainwash the Sri Lankan population thru unrepresentative NGOs and journalists they fund.

[C] Interference through NGOs

Foreign-funded NGOs

Foreign funded NGOs (F.F.NGOs). F.F.NGOsare a new phenomenon of the last 25 years Earlier we had local voluntary organizations Now increasingly through foreign funds small unrepresentative groups can influence the country.

First a Word about F.F. NGOs. Some NGOs perform good functions But in poor Third World, they are a New Private Sector Old Private Sector accountable -to markets New Private Sector - NGOs -accountable only to themselves and donor agencies NGOs marginalize real local alternatives.

New NGO Colonialism: Some facts. In Third World, NGO mercenaries have more privileges than university academics or local cultural producers They get more income They travel more and so create false linkages between non-West and West NGOs' preemptive access to West and vice versa-distorts world

Real Civil Society vs Bogus NGOs. NGO preempt real civil society NGOs privatize foreign policy NGOs, carry a neo- colonial agenda Meanwhile hundreds of trade, professional, and other organizations constituting real civil society are left out of the loop

Foreign funded NGOs. NGOs have a role to play in such areas as health NGOs that do not interfere in the sovereignty of Sri Lanka do no harm But no foreign organization should interfere in our sovereignty. But this is precisely what Norwegian funded NGOs have done NGOs have stood against the sovereignty of this country such as welcoming Indian troops, and asking for foreign intervention Norway has become a proxy ruler through these NGO front organizations.

Norwegian Subversion thru F.F. NGOs: Examples. Two Norwegian funded organizations: "International Alert" (IA) operating internationally And the "National Peace Council" (NPC) operating locally, provide revealing dimensions of how the subversion of Sri Lanka by Norwegian funds has been carefully coordinated and carried out.

International Alert (IA).

IA was formed in the 1980s specifically targeted on Sri Lanka. Its beginnings were to support the Tamil separatist cause. Thus, IA's charter was to make "widely known", "the present condition of the Tamil people and their demands".

IA's activities: "Staging Coup": IA was accused of staging a coup in Sierra Leone. IA had to face a string of accusations that went up to the UN and the Organization of African Unity. In parts of official Africa, IA's name turned black with allegations of diamond smuggling, arming of illegal groups and supporting a coup under the cover of "conflict resolution". IA Director was Kumar Rupasinghe

IA in Sri Lanka comprehensive infiltration: IA's first initiative [in Sri Lanka] was to form a committee of experts Initially, the intelligentsia, the military, the business community, press and other media, religious organizations, politicians ......... were all designated strategic sectors to work with IA This was a cross section of the entire Sri Lankan political structure. A comprehensive infiltration of the entire power structure was attempted using IA's already published pro separatist agenda

To Propagate its views in Sri Lanka: IA sent "journalists and "peace activists"to other conflict -torn societies Produced TV programs, had seminars Sent parliamentarians on trips to other conflict ridden areas "identified with the assistance of the National Peace Council (NPC)"

Anti Sri Lankan: And when Sri Lankan troops were about to take back Jaffna from the LTTE, Kumar Rupasinghe, Director of IA came on the BBC Sinhala service (28th November,1995) called for UN intervention to prevent Jaffna being regained.

International Alert Scandals: After a major series of scandals IA was internationally attacked, then probed It lost law suits by London employees on charges of gross discrimination Under this cloud, its Director Kumar Rupasinghe soon resigned Its funder Norway commissioned a report critical of IA.

Norwegian report on IA: The report criticizes the IA for "lack of clarity and transparency"(p x.).... Problems of credibility and transparency - contradictions between IA's stated position and its actual interventions. -continued to affect IA .... and led to mistrust and suspicion that the organization was not neutral nor transparent in its dealing with international organizations"(p.62). All these actions were now "seriously affecting the organization's reputation, credibility and effectiveness and, therefore, also [the IA] staff morale"(p. 63.)

A New Form of Imperialism: Through IA "the ability of the West to directly modify internal political processes .......... is greater today than at any time since the colonial period". "There are a growing number of critics [in the west of such activities] .... which interpret this as a new form of imperialism"

National Peace Council (NPC)

National Peace Council (NPC) Chief ally of IA and other intruders NPC recognizes the invented traditional homelands of Tamils'hoax as valid and stated so explicitly

National Peace Council March. The organizer of the National Peace Council is Ajith Rupasinghe, the brother of IA's Kumar . He participated in a march and rally of the Tigers in Geneva and spoke at the rally. The "rally ended with [the LTTE] liberation song sung in chorus".

The Media Director of the National Peace Council is the extremist Jehan Perera At the time of the Indian incursion he threatened Sri Lanka with dire consequences Jehan Perera has also questioned the need for sovereignty and had called for "shared sovereignty "and two near-states

The NPC Strategy. The NPC has spelled out in their publications the NPC strategy of going to the Sri Lankan population for their particular brand of "peace". It targets the total population of the country from the top political hierarchy to the grass roots for a comprehensive propaganda campaign.
The NPC says that their main targets... are grassroots organizations, NGO networks and sectoral organizations, political elites, religious leaders and communities and cultural agents. ... The people's organizations are the base of this NPC's strategic pyramid. ... At the middle are the various sectoral networks of professional associations, trade unions, peasant organizations, and women and youth organizations. At the very top are the political, cultural and religious elites and power structure primarily in Sri Lanka but also internationally.
A carefully laid out propaganda strategy aimed at different strata in the country. Targets people on a mass scale through high visibility and high impact multi- media campaigns, utilizing television, radio, newspaper and wall posters. Their slogans, equate the LTTE with the government and further do not take place in Tamil dominated areas, but in Sinhala majority areas.

NPC collaborators. Other organizations that have collaborated with the NPC are all foreign funded Estimate 46 journalists in pay of NPC often getting more money from NPC than from their employees.

Not Voluntary. These NGO activities are not to be confused with the voluntary peace movements in the West. Sri Lanka participants are "targets", they are selected, "educated"in the ideology and then paid to attend these meetings. They are not motivated through their voluntary will.

Targeting Soldiers. By targeting the so-called border areas (that is where the Tigers are active) and soldiers, the NPC propaganda was targeting the major victims of the Tigers It was in effect psychologically disarming them.

NPC propagand a machine. At the grass roots it is given by a Mr. S. Balakrishnan of MIRJE. MIRJE an organization singled out by separatists as unquestionably accepting the traditional homelands fiction They indirectly endorsed ethnic cleansing of non Tamils under the guise of removing existing settlements in hitherto jungle lands.

Podi Nilame

H. Podinilame, Centre for Human Development, at a Seminar held in Oslo on 17 June 2003 He made a presentation on "The Challenges of Building Lasting Peace in Sri Lanka". Other speakers were Eric Solheim[from the Norway Perspective] and Rajah Balasingham[from the LTTE Perspective]

Who is Rajah Balasingham? Rajah Balashinghamis a member of the Oslo Municipality Government. He was allegedly elected after the LTTE "fixed" the ballots. The Norwegian authorities detected this election fraud, but Balashingham denied his involvement in the fraud, and was elected into the Oslo Municipality Government for the Labour party. He is an important figure in the LTTE in Norway. orway.htm.

Key Points Podi Nilame Emphasized Were: There is no adequate flow [about the NGO so-called peace process] of information to the people Nationally 65.8%, say that that they are not adequately informed [about the NGO so-called peace process and so not sympathetic to it]
Three types of "anti-peace"[that is anti NGO peace] groups are active. They are a) JVP b) Sihala Urumaya c) Groups of Buddhist monks The activities of the few [f.f.NGO] organizations "promoting peace"such as Podi Nilame's Centre for Human Development are not sufficient to counteract the "anti- peace" [that is anti NGO peace] message.

Podi Nilame Wants Funding? In order to ensure sustainable peace Podi Nilame wants to increase power to self styled "civil society" [that is to FF NGOs], Increase education and awareness- raising at community level [that is brain wash the people] Increase partnership between local and international NGOs [that is more international funds to NGOs] Greater coordination among international donors. [that is intensify the re- colonization process] Podi Nilame wants to "bring grassroots voices to the top" [that is foreign funding for groups like him]

Who then is this Who then is this PodiNilame? I know PodiNilame. 5 years ago he invited me as Chief Speaker for the Annual Meeting of local NGOs getting Canadian funds In my speech I emphasized the need for fund recipients to think independently and not just be Canadian puppets After my speech PodiNilame lost his Canadian funding.

Podi Nilame Retools. Podi Nilame then sought Norwegian funds He became a Norwegian "peace activist' In my public sector life I have interviewed around 10,000 job applicants and recruited around 3,000 from Senior Management to worker The highest I would recruit Podi Nilame would be to Minor Supervisor. Now with foreign money he wants to brain wash us

Norwegian money creates artificial NGO personalities out of no-bodies Only Norwegian money sustains them. The unrepresentative and artificial NGO groups and personnel spawned through Norwegian funds, now [August 2004] have demanded, among others, restructuring the Sri Lankan state under foreign guidance, demilitarization and de- mobilization of the country's armed forces. This is a clear re- colonization agenda. These are only a few examples of NGOs. The agendas of NGOs referred to here are against popular feeling They could go against popular opinion because they have access to foreign Norwegian -funding.

[D] "Norway above All"

Norge über Alles?

Norway intrudes on Sri Lanka But what are Norway's own political arrangements in comparison with Sri Lanka?

New Colonialis t Norway. Norway Constitution: the "Evangelical-Lutheran religion"is "official religion" "inhabitants professing it are bound to bring up their children in the same". Thus formally forbids citizens to change religion from Lutheranism. The Executive Power, the King, mustbe a member of the official religion and must "uphold and protect it".
New Colonialist Norway Senior officials must speak Norwegian King's Council should have a majority of Evangelical- Lutherans An International body can interfere only with a prior "three-fourths majority" of parliament, but will "not" have the "power to alter the Constitution".

Norwegian State Practices. Norway put the Nazis' theory of selective breeding into practice. Like the Nazis sterilized people as racial policy up to 1994. These racist ideas gave rise to Quisling, the Norwegian leader under the Nazis. Minority Lapps Samis) -suffered. Young Sami children encouraged to ignore their heritage and until very recently, forbidden to learn their language at school. Sami language in Church was banned. Sri Lanka has no equivalent for such discriminatory acts.

Ethnic legal relations. Tamil and Sinhala are equal official languages Full freedom of religious conscience and other freedoms In these matters more formal equality to minorities than say in Norway, India etc.

[E] Conclusions

At Ground Level

Most Sinhalese and Tamils today have no rancor The North is ethnically cleansed of Sinhalese & Muslims but still there have been no recent riots in the South although Preliminary studies in North and East suggest that there is very high level of goodwill among ordinary citizens in devastated areas in the N&E But surprisingly humanity emerges

Far more Tamils live today in the South than in North, which is ethnically cleansed by LTTE of Sinhalese and Muslims Those who have visited North & East report on the very strong warmth of ordinary Tamils to Sinhalese (& vice versa).

But Translating Norwegian Practice to Sri Lanka. Unlike today, Buddhism would be the State religion (now given only "foremost position"); There will be a ban on conversions State officials must speak Sinhala (Sinhala, Tamil and English are today all official languages); Norwegian interference on our affairs will only be allowed after three- fourths of parliament's approval. It will not be allowed for any discussion to alter the Constitution Tamil children like the Samis will not be allowed to pray in Tamil.

Sri Lanka has been made to fail. Sri Lanka in some writings associated with NGOs has been called a failed state But the push to failure were ably aided by the NGOs and their sponsors like Norway

Americans' Attitudes. In the US, the Logan Act prohibits U.S. private citizens from interfering with foreign policy. After the Indian proxy invasion of Sri Lanka the American Ambassador to Sri Lanka , told a reporter "We [meaning Americans] still blame the Japanese, but ironically in Sri Lanka , the people do not blame India". One does not have to go far to seek for possible reasons. The Sri Lankan public has been continuously brain washed partly by indirect Norway funds to accept a loss of sovereignty.

But 2,500 Years, 500 Years of Resistance. Sri Lanka is a very much older civilization than Norway. It has a long historical memory. In the last 500 years of full or partial subjugation by foreign powers we learnt the art of resistance.

Sri Lanka: Thinking the Thinkable? Taking into account cost-benefit criteria of the war and Norway's pro-separatist bias, question: In Sri Lanka's aim of building a secure, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural democratic society, would she be better off rejecting all Norwegian development aid and temporarily suspending diplomatic relations with Norway until quieter times emerge?

Norway: Thinking the Thinkable. Would not Norway have done the same under similar conditions of humiliation? We can still be friends. Hands off. The resistance lives.

Thank You. Takk

In 1994 the Norwegian University of Tromso entered into an agreement with the University of Jaffna" for the development of the Tamil Eelam areas". This agreement was signed by Professor Thurairajah who built the three storied air conditioned headquarters of the Tigers.



Copyright 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reproduction In Whole Or In Part Without Express Permission is Prohibited.