Dr. Chula Rajapakse MNZM Spokesperson, United Sri Lanka Association

Ladies & Genlemen

I would like to join you all in reinforcing once again our eternal gratitude to the Ranaviru , who sacrificed life and limb to liberate Sri Lanka from three decades of Tiger terrorism.

Unfortunately, the honor and glory of this achievement has been challenged and denigrated by the ongoing allegations that, this liberation had been achieved through violation of the human rights of the three hundred thousand rescued Tamil civilians during the last weeks of this liberation.

These allegations originated from the international Tiger Diaspora within days of the liberation on the 19^th of May 2009. However, they have been orchestrated by powerful media and political allies, secured by the diaspora using their ill gotten war chest of billions, and by the cunning manipulation of the Tamil vote in marginal electorates in Britain and Canada. Even US has chosen to buy into these , as a convenient way of furthering their geopolitical interests in the Indian Ocean region

This campaign has now reached a pitch that has seen the UNHRC authorizing it’s ethnic Tamil head Navy Pillai to appoint a commission to investigate these allegations against the “Sinhalese Army”. If the pronouncements of Navy Pillai on Sri Lanka in the past, the pronouncements of the Darusman commission and the reporting from the international media of CHOGM is anything to go by, further denigration of the Ranaviru is a done deal, in the hands of  such a commission.

We, you , me and all of us, therefore owe it to these valiant servicemen who laid down their life and limb to protect Sri Lanka for us, to protect their honor by countering these allegations, at every opportunity, during interactions with your Kiwi friends, politicians , media and others. To do so, you would need to be conversant with why these allegations have no credibility.

Permit me a moment to outline these.

The main basis of these allegations is that this liberation by the Ranaviru was achieved through an unacceptably high casualty rate among the three hundred thousand and more trapped Tamil civilians through both indiscriminate and directed shooting at them by the Ranaviru. The number of civilian casualties most frequently referred to is forty thousand.

So, how was this number arrived at ?

The first number for the Tamil civilian casualties appeared in the Tamil net within days of the end of the war, claiming a figure of seven thousand odd, quoting UN sources. The UN under secretary Sir John Holms who was in charge of Sri Lanka then, was quick to dissociate the UN from this claim ,on the grounds that the UN had no way of knowing accurately the number of casualties, as it was not at the war front in the last few weeks of the war.

This angered the Diaspora and their ally’s who accused the UN of colluding with the SL government, to keep the numbers low. This was vehemently denied by the UN. Not with standing this, The London Times, who had an axe to grind with the SL government, having had their reporter expelled earlier by the SL government for what was seen by them as a transgression of rules, came up with the next figure of 20,000 claiming it to be on analysis of   areal photographs .

Next in the numbers game was Gordon Weiss, a Colombo based UN employee with book on SL call the ” The Cage” to sell, sensationalized the numbers further by claiming a casualty rate of 40, 000 based on sources he refused to divulge. He however retracted on this figure to 10,000 on intense questioning at his book launch in Australia a year later.

What provided most currency for this number was the UN secretary generals panel of experts , the Darusman commission, that consisted of three commissioners with adverse encounters with Sri Lanka in the recent past, who concurred that there were “credible allegations of 40,000 casualties”. However, what is rarely mentioned by the Diaspora allies that quote them ad nauseam is that, this report begins by conceding that the numbers in their report are not factual as they have notbeen verified, and that they refused to reveal the source of their information for thirty , both of which left very little credibility remaining, with their findings.

Another organization that frequently quotes these numbers, is Amnesty International, which was forced to concede that they had received a handy encouragement by way of a $50,000 donation in Canada for their efforts.

Another group orchestrating these allegations is the cash strapped UK TV Channel 4, to whom the diaspora war chest would have been a tantalizing attraction , who have also carried many”documentaries”, beginning with Sri Lanka Killing fields, based on un-attributable video clips claimed to be from the war front showing gruesome injuries of war, with a biased commentary directing the viewer to draw a connection between these injuries and SL forces fire.

Besides this lack of credibility of the claim of 40,000 casualties based on the evolution of this number as detailed above, there are also compelling arguments against these numbers being factual.

For a start, if the SL forces fire led to 40,000 Tamil civilian casualties in a few weeks, would 300,000 of them stream into the arms of these very same forces who were responsible for these casualties, immediately the bund preventing them from doing so   was breached, as they did in full view of the worlds media.

If the forces were bent on shooting these civilians, why would they send the next two years demining the land at great personal risk, to resettle these 300,000 in their own homes as they have done. Or spend the years there after improving the infrastructure of these areas to secure the 20% annual growth that has been recorded in these liberated areas.

In the films ” Lies agreed upon” (see Lanka Web), over fifty ordinary Tamil civilians speaking   for these rescued three hundred thousand had only praise for the SL forces and confirmed that the only directed fire came from the Tigers, to prevent them escaping.   Six doctors and a Tamil MP, who were among these civilians corroborated these testimonies further.

A SL governmentcensus conducted  by  Tamil teachers  in Feb /March 2012 in the war zones has established that the number of war related deaths was 7432 very similar to the first estimation released by the UN  and quoted by the Tamil net. Given that the security forces lost about 4000 in the last days of this war , it would be reasonable to estimate that, of the 7432, a similar number would have been Tiger fighters, reducing the non combatant civiliansstill further to around 3000 and quite consistent with collateral damage given their deliberate exposure as human shields , by the Tigers. However, the estimation of the Tamil doctors referred to above , of the dead civilians they encountered, was 7-800. These are a far cry from the 40,000 figure.

Further, the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) was set up among others   to hear evidence in support of this type of allegation as was the Army commission to investigate civilian deaths though army action. However , nothing was forthcoming regarding the alleged 40,000.

All these wouldconstitute convincing reasons for these allegations of 40,000 casualties having no credible basis.

The question then is , if you are so sure why notcooperate with the Navy Pillai appointed commission and establish your innocence. The simple answer is Sri Lanka has no confidence of getting a fair hearing under her direction.

SL’s past experience as detailed below , inspires only apprehension that a biased commission with a preconceived conclusions , confirming the allegations , paying attention only to evidence adverse to SL, would be the outcome.

The Darusman commission is a case in point where three commissioners with declared adverse disposition to SL were appointed. These entertained representation, which as explained earlier, they have refused to reveal the sources of, for thirty years and came out with conclusions , which in their own reckoning were unverified and so had no factual basis. However, they provided fodder to be used by the diaspora against SL repeatedly, and   strike a chord with the undiscerning listener.

Navy Pillai, when she visited Sri Lanka, spent a week, meeting only TNA sponsored civilians. She did not meet a single of the relatives of some 70,000 victims of Tiger Terrorism , suicide bombings and all , and submitted a report adverse to SL.

At the CHOGM , SL opened it’s doors to the foreign media who only submitted reports adverse to SL, ignoring completely all the outstanding achievements in reconciliation and development of both the war ravaged areas and elsewhere.

Reports on the British PM David Camerons, visit to Jaffna at the CHOGM gave prominence only to the TNA’s carefully choreographed demonstration from some twenty odd women brandishing photographs, claiming them to be of their missing sons. This, even drew the response from famed Tamil cricketer Muttiah Muralidaran who had earlier claimed that David Cameron was being mislead that, ” even these women claiming missing sons , could be misleading”, which indeed was most probably the case.

David Cameron, this champion of democracy ,at his press conference , did not field a single question from the SL media lest he be put on the spot & chose to seek questions from only his friendly British mates. So much for the fianc© of a product of Eaton!

This is a fore taste of fairness that Sri Lanka can expect from a Navy Pillai commission.

Another, adverse implication of  such a commission is extolled eloquently by MP Mr. Arun Tambimuttu ( lanka web) who explained that opening a further investigation would only cause anguish to over one third of the families in the eastern province , who would have had involvement with the war and who are now moving beyond their war wounds. These would be painfully reopened in a further investigation.

The famed Tamil cricketer, while on inter view with channel four also asked, “why dig up the past, past is past, we also had our house burnt in 1983, but now we have moved on, forget and forgive, isn’t that what Jesus said?”.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We owe it to the Ranaviru to be conversant with these reasons why the allegation that they achieved their liberation of Sri Lankathrough violation of human rights, has no credibility, so that we can defend their honor and integrity at every turn.

Thank you

Dr. Chula Rajapakse MNZM

Spokesperson,

United Sri Lanka Association