“Pottu†Radhika’s anti-Sri Lankan politics bring disrepute to UN
Posted on May 3rd, 2010
H. L. D. Mahindapala
When on May 27, 2009 Dayan Jayatilleka turned the tables on the West at the Human Rights Commission (HRC) in Geneva and scored the biggest ever diplomatic victory, by not only throwing out the WestƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s draft resolution against Sri Lanka but also by imposing his own, it stunned the West, the Tamil lobby and even the Foreign Office of Sri Lanka. At the UN Radhika Coomaraswamy, Under-Secretary General for Children in Armed Conflict,-was driven to desperation by DayanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s stunning victory. The reaction of the Tamil diasporic lobby, which was hoping to win through the European diplomats at Geneva, was summed up in the four-line e-mail sent by Radhika to her anti-Sri Lankan network of NGOs and INGOs.
HereƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s the unedited full text:
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ From: Radhika Coomaraswamy
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 08:48:47 -0700 (PDT)
To:ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
| Dear All
Disiater (sic) is final. The Sri lankan (sic) draft as modifiedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ has been adopted at the HRC, Europeans lost openly and Dayan made the most obnoxious speech. It is terrible. RC |
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If this does not reveal her hidden hand playing her usual political role against Sri Lanka what else can? She is wringing her hands in desperation in this e-mail and crying that the Europeans, who were going to be her saviours, have lost and that Dayan had made ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-the most obnoxious speechƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚? She ends up saying: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-ItƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s terrible.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Terrible to whom? Not to the genuine Sri Lankans. She is not one bit happy that Sri Lanka has won. She wanted the Europeans to win because their victory would have helped to save Velupillai Prabhakaran, by putting additional pressure on the Sir Lankan government, to stop the Vadukoddai War. As a covert agent for Tamil politics she would have been very happy if the Europeans won. So on May 27, the day the Europeans were defeated by DayanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s deft diplomatic demarche, she cries: ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-ItƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s terrible.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ She means that itƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s terrible that the Europeans could not save the fascist leader whom she was trying to protect, in a last minute bid, from political extinction.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ In her job description at the UN she is forbidden to play a partisan role in any conflict. To keep up the pretence, she excuses herself from getting involved in Sri Lankan affairs saying that she should not only be non-partisan but also seen to be above politics. As an international civil servant, sitting in a key position in the UN, it is her duty to be at least neutral. But whereƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s her neutrality when she cries in desperation that DayanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s victory is a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-disaster.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Disaster to whom? How can a victory to Sri Lanka be a disaster to her unless, of course she was against Sri Lanka winning? IsnƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t this a confession of her partisan role which she has been playing all along with Neelan Tiruchelvam, from the day she joined the Tamil political base at the ICES?
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ She even goes to the extreme of dubbing DayanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s speech as ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-obnoxiousƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚. Pray, tell us whatƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s obnoxious about DayanƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s speech? What was there in his speech that offended the virginal modesty of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-PottuƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ Radhika? This confirms beyond any vestige of doubt that she is the anti-Sri Lankan agent playing her usual game of partisan Tamil politics, hiding behind the smokescreen of a neutral international civil servant. There is no doubt that her scheming, underhand, obnoxious role has brought disrepute to the UN. It is scandalous that she should be allowed to do anything related to Sri Lanka now that she has exposed her hand. How can she be a part of the inner cabinet of the UN where key decisions are made on sovereign states like Sri Lanka when she is anti-Sri Lankan?
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UN Secretariat has been swinging against Sri Lanka in a marked way since Radhika joined the Ban-Ki MoonƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s inner cabinet. She has been taking cover behind the noble principles of the UN Charter to launch her activities against Sri Lanka. Her actions reveal that she has never ceased to use the noble principles, either at the UN or at her political base in Sri Lanka, for her ignoble partisan politics. She has always been a Jaffna jingoist in jeans in Sri Lanka. At the UN she is playing the role of ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-Pottu AmmaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ now that Pottu Amman is no longer there in the Vanni. ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ At the height of the crisis she was trying to push Sri Lanka into a diplomatic corner. Her stated reason was that we should have compromised and gone for a consensus without ‘antagonising’ the West. But the fact is that the West was gunning for us relentlessly. ( See my previous article in Lanka Web: RadhikaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s R2P plot to Prabhakaran sinks in Nandhikadal ) It was a no-holds barred battle. While Radhika was advocating a backstage compromise, the fact is that West was never going to make New York the battleground, with Russia and China having veto power in the Security Council. She was arguing that it is possible to bypass the veto if itƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s a discussion but you cannot even have a discussion UNLESS it is a matter of international security, which Sri Lanka was not. The sheer numbers in the UN General Assembly ruled out that forum too. So the West had decided on a pitched battle in Geneva to secure a UN mandate on Sri Lanka. A victory at Geneva was critical for Sri Lanka and for the West. . In Geneva Sri Lanka was not even a member, since we lost the membership election on Prasad Kariyawasam’s watch in 2008.
In Geneva the West-NGO-Tamil lobby met the unexpected. They never bargained for Dayan. With his no-nonsense approach Dayan went for an outright win, which was the equivalent of what the Security forces achieved on the ground on May 18, 2009. No halfway house. No compromise. The compromise diplomacy of New York was based on the premise that we could not win. Prasad Kariyawasam even told Mahinda Samarasinghe once, in the presence two others, that ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-if you are talking of a military victory I donƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢t want to be Foreign Secretary.ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Disregarding the mandarins of the Foreign Office Dayan went for an outright win. The West lobbied in capitals all over the world against us. The irony is that pompous Rohitha Bogollagama, our Foreign Minister, and even some of the Foreign Office mandarins were attempting to undermine Dayan. The EU parliament resolution of April 15th, 2009 and the joint article in the TIMES by Miliband and Kouchner, and their remarks at the UN in New York at the end April were the stepping stones to Geneva, through which they hoped to secure a UN resolution and mandate. But Dayan gave them the works that made Radhika cry so desperately: Disaster! Obnoxious! Terrible!
Another key player in the Foreign Office who was happy to kow-tow to the West was Jayantha Dhanapala. He is another careerist who used the Sri Lankan ladder to climb up and then kicked it. He was noted for producing the P(Pacha)-TOMS which virtually handed over the post-tsunami administration of the north and the east to the Tigers. This was his claim to fame. He was also seen as a stooge of the West by the dubious role he played as the head of inspection team to Iraq. This is one reason why he lost the battle for the Secretary-Generalship. He is also closely allied to Radhika socially and ideologically. Radhika picked him to promote R2P at the ICES (that place again!) after Gareth Evans (that man again!) at the ICES. Birds of a feather were flocking together in the last stages of the war to save Prabhakaran all under the provisions of R2P. .
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It is an undeniable record that the greatest triumph of our Foreign Office was won by a non-career diplomat. Jayantha Dhanapala and Shirley Amerasinghe are, for instance, names associated with diplomatic services rendered to the West. They have not scored victories for the nation that gave them the break. Of course, they are entitled to their achievements in their own fields. But in terms of taking on the mighty powers of the West and defeating them in their own game at the highest diplomatic, at the critical time when Sri Lanka needed it most, they cannot touch even the little toe of Dayan at Geneva even if they crawl on all their fours. He was the right man, at the right time at the right place. His robust diplomacy produced the miracle at Geneva. It is not the style that matters in diplomacy but the substance and greatness of Dayan is that he delivered the substance in style, Radhika notwithstanding. Parenthetically, I must confess that I cannot speak of Pali (H. M. G. S. Palihakkara) because he has placed a permanent ban on his name being mentioned anywhere. Apart from that who is else is there to mention in the Foreign Service?.
Tyronne Fernando and Rohitha Bogollagama are two peas of the same rotten pod. They thought that they could outshine Lakshman Kadirgamar. They were not even fit to polish his shoes. Much is expected of Prof. G. L. Peiris. He has the capacity to achieve if he steers his own course without being a prisoner of the foreign Office careerists who are either intimated or purchasable by the West. Our Foreign Office mafia is not yet used to the new shift to the East. They still think that the sun rises from the West. Prof PeirisƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢ task at the moment is to tie a ring round their nose and drag them to the East.
May 3rd, 2010 at 3:05 pm
I think the date should be April 27 not May 27, because on May 18th Prbhakaran was killed. Radhika’s e-mail makes her naked.
Jayantha Danapala is a Christian Agent.
May 3rd, 2010 at 11:33 pm
But Mahindapala tries to fool others by writting his “OWN” because he did not tell the path of the e-mail. That shows his stupidity.
Shall I call him HORA or Harakka Mahindapala because his intial starts with H?
It is OK! What happened to Dr. Dayan Jayatilake who was pulled away from Geneva to satisfy the UNP idiots and other WESTERN panthangkarayas?
May 4th, 2010 at 12:03 am
The path need not be disclosed and he has given the unedited text and it is up to Pottu Radhika to deny. This forum provides an exchange of valuable information and not for unnecessary name calling. It takes one Harakka to identify another as they graze in the same pastures.
May 4th, 2010 at 1:03 am
Mahindapala was NOT writing his “OWN” but has given the extract of of PottuRadhika’s letter. Just because your initial starts with M we do not want to call you Modaya, Musalaya, Monkey Moon or anything else. But, I don’t know why you have made your first (2) letters in capital MUdali for the rest of your name. Mind (U)your language?
May 4th, 2010 at 7:09 am
Grow up Mudali.
May 4th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
Calling names instead of debating issues raised is a defensive mecanism used by some when they cannot intelligently argue a point. I wonder why MS MUdali seems to be trying to silence persons like Mahindapala and Asoka Weerasinghe, who have been relentlessly trying to defend the country of their birth. It is alright batting for the opposite camp but one should maintain decorum and not allow personal issues to colour good judgement.
As for Mahindapala’s revelations in his article, I agree with C.Wije’s comment that “Radhika’s e-mail makes her naked”. The question now is, why is she allowed to continue in her position if her bias against a member nation of the UN, is so very obvious? Should not that email be sent to the UN Secretary General for suitable action?
May 5th, 2010 at 1:58 am
This is a PUBLIC FORUM. If you make allegations of a person in any Public Office, you must provide the TRUTH. But Mahindapala makes a RACIST harangue by calling Radhika as POTTU Radhika. He spells the name of Dayan Jaya thilaka(e) as Jaya TILLEKE (ජය තිලක ). POTTU =THILAKA(තිලක) = திலக(ம்) or பொட்டு.
Is he mad or dont know how to write names in correct form? he makes JOKES out of a persons ethnic culture.
Those who support Mahindapala, keep silence why Buddha too had the POTTU or THILAKA, a Hindu symbol!
This is like people make jokes about disable people or others’ appearance. Is it right to call a Buddhist Monk as THATTAYA or Mottaya?
Mahindapala is not writting to his wife but to the world. He must be civilised enough to talk with people!
May 5th, 2010 at 2:28 am
Mr MUdali,
If Radhika was blind we would have called her Potta Radhika instead of Pottu Radhika. Pottu is Thilaka or Thilake in Sinhala language. Pottu is not an insult or racist rhetoric but has many other nice meanings also in Sinhala. It also gives the meaning of unblossomed flower thus making Radhika in her bloom of youth.
You can write Sinhala names in English with different spellings Jayathilaka or Jayatilleke.
Buddha never had a Pottu or Thilaka but a fringe (bang) a hanging coiled hair on the forehead. Buddha never had any tattoos or cosmetic decorations on Him.
May 5th, 2010 at 5:11 am
This woman is bourn with the decease called racism. If this obnoxious weed is not removed , UN credibility, if any, will deminish to zero soon. Surely this abnormal pottu is a sign of her birth defect.
GL was a part of the “peace pact”. Not sure how he could handle this. May be he is wached closely.
May 5th, 2010 at 6:26 am
Since, as MUdali points out, ‘thilaka’ also means ‘pottu’, perhaps this article should be re-titled ‘A tale of two pottus’ or similar.
But, on serious note, would HLDM’s article have been any less effective, if he had not made any reference at all to RC’s “pottu”?
May 5th, 2010 at 6:51 am
Sri Lanka is NON ALIGNED. Lanka should work for her own Development, in a Non-aligned way. Take help from all, give help to all. No East West divisions, please. We have all suffered enough.
May 5th, 2010 at 8:32 am
Tilaka is a Hindu religious symbol common to all Hindus, irrespective of ethnicity, and was worn by Hindus in the whole of the Indian sub-continent, including SriLanka, before buddhism was introduced. A Tilaka is worn not only on the forehead but on other parts of the body and are of varying shapes. Prince Siddharatha may have worn a Tilaka before he attained Buddhahood. But it is incorrect to assume Buddha wore a tilaka on his forehead after attaining enlightenment, as it went against his own doctrine of not believing in superstitions or beauty symbols or identity labels. As for the term “Pottu”, I believe it is slightly different in that it could be just a a circular spot worn on the face as a beauty symbol.
May 5th, 2010 at 11:41 am
Here is another definition of the Tilaka or Pottu :
“In Hinduism and Buddhism, the third eye is a symbol of enlightenment (moksha and nirvana). In the Indian tradition, it is referred to as the gyananakashu, the eye of knowledge, which is the seat of the ‘teacher inside’ or antar-guru. The third eye is the ajna chakra (sixth chakra) also known as brow chakra or brow centre. This is commonly denoted in Indian and East Asian iconography with a dot, eye or mark on the forehead of deities or enlightened beings, such as Shiva, the Buddha, or any number of yogis, sages and bodhisattvas. This symbol is called the “Third Eye” or “Eye of Wisdom”, or, in Buddhism, the urna. In Hinduism, it is believed that the opening of Shiva’s third eye causes the eventual destruction of the physical universe.
Many Hindus wear a tilak between the eyebrows to represent the third eye.
In the Upanishads, a human being is likened to a city with ten gates. Nine gates (eyes, nostrils, ears, mouth, urethra, anus) lead outside to the sensory world. The third eye is the tenth gate and leads to inner realms housing myriad spaces of consciousness”.
Generally it is a small dot placed between the eye brows.
May 5th, 2010 at 12:52 pm
names associated with diplomatic services rendered to the West. They have not scored victories for the nation that gave them the break great site really informative i learned a lot great stuff keep it up
by cas paper writing service
May 6th, 2010 at 5:39 am
Thank you Fran diaz for the information. Now some cry that Buddha never had POTTU or TILAK. I am seriously worried whether they are Buddhists or something else. The Tilak or thilakam or Pottu is always the third eye and it is ientified as WISDOM = BUDDHI. That is why Prince Siddhartha became Buddha ( who has the knowledge) and with POTTU every where.
Now some idiots try to paint a picture that Hinduism is an enemy of Buddhism! I called that attitude PARANGI BUDDHISM!
Very soon these guys going to tell “Buddha was from Budapest and not from India”. hahaha
This time I like to tell the words of Prez Mahinda ” China and Pakisatan are friends but India is my relative!”
May 6th, 2010 at 7:00 am
Ah! Friends and Relatives. I remember what Sir John once said “God gave me my friends and the devil gave me my relatives” !
May 6th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
Sir John was a British boot licker and naturaly he never understood Sri Lankans. That is why UNP still bark for foreigners!
May 6th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
Abraham Licoln was polishing his boots and a friend asked him in dismay, “Are you polishing your own boots?” He replied, “Yes, I am, whose boots are you polishing?”
Whose boots are you licking MU?
May 7th, 2010 at 2:01 am
Thank you, Nihal Fernando. I can never understand MUdali’s curious logic!
May 7th, 2010 at 5:18 am
While I think Radhika has a right to wear her ‘pottu’, I hear that it is very large & red – like Mars rising out of her brows ! She really ought to be loyal to the country of her birth which nurtured her entire family, and not besmirch it abroad when it is struggling out of some 500 yrs of Colonial rule, especially the Brit ‘divide & rule’ policy. It was mainly due to Colonial Rule that Lanka’s rural population was neglected, with added negativity of the Tamil Caste Issue in the North, that so many insurrections came about.
She & Ms Navi Pillai who are both at the UN should concentrate more on the Human Rights record of Tamil Nadu where some 5 Million Tamil Dalits (Untouchables) are languishing. Lanka never practiced Untouchability.
May 8th, 2010 at 4:46 am
Fran:
Pottu or Thilakam has its own deffinitions. But the CASTE issues cannot be a human rights issue anywhere! If that is the case many nations must face the problems including Sri Lanka!
Your claim on Sri Lanka is not true. Just read the bride-groom columns of our news papers!
May 9th, 2010 at 8:14 am
Caste issues of Lanka are minimal due to free education. An educated, well mannered person with good values is accepted in society, irrespective of caste.
In Tamil Nadu & rest of India, Dalits have no Caste – they are casteless. Yes, it is a Human Rights issue, as there is INSTITUTIONALIZED DISCRIMINATION, though concerned people all over India are trying to find solutions & laws have been passed to help Dalits.