By Shivanthi ranasinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today

For nearly a decade-and-a-half, the British establishment has been catering a damning falsehood against Sri Lanka. There had been a concerted effort with the active participation of the British media and Parliament to defame Sri Lanka as war criminals. Notable politicians as Prime Ministers Tony Blair and David Cameron have behaved disrespectfully towards Sri Lanka and have done their best to embarrass Sri Lanka. Today, in the most unexpected manner Britain has got a taste of their own medicine from the most unexpected quarters – Prince Harry and his wife Meghan Markle.

Justifying terror

Since 1975, Sri Lanka had been gripped by a terror group that plundered, murdered, enslaved children and wreaked absolute havoc and destruction – all in the name of Tamils in the North and East. As the Tamils are a minority community in Sri Lanka, the issue was politically sensitive.

Unfortunately, there were many stakeholders and onlookers who benefited from the ensuing confusion. Therefore, their effort was to encourage the deteriorating situation than help contain it. Somehow the slaughter of innocent civilians, which included babies still in their mothers’ wombs to the elderly and everyone in-between was justified as collateral damage in a freedom fight. Not even a 12-year old monk – the most harmless in Sri Lankan society – was spared in this so-called freedom fight that destroyed the very people in whose name the terror was unleashed.

It is noteworthy that in the three decades of terror, three generations of Tamil children lost their future. As the new millennium dawned, the world was speculating how computer-driven systems handle the change of date.

In the North and East of Sri Lanka, parents were wondering how to keep their children from being forcibly conscripted by the terrorist organisation. Some parents went to extraordinary lengths to protect their children.  Yet, according to a UNICEF count, LTTE was holding over 5,000 children in their underage cadre. At the time, not even a national school had that many students in all its 13 grades.

The blame for this awful situation must be borne solely by Sri Lankan politicians. They dastardly lacked political will to end terrorism in Sri Lanka as they tried to gain political leverage at the expense of innocent Sri Lankan citizens. However, the manner the outside world reacted to this crisis was also very telling.

Outrageous British Behaviour

For decades during the terrorist era, British media gave a very biased coverage of what we were experiencing. This was echoed by the British politician, whose outrage on the atrocities committed by the terrorists was greatly muted compared to the  grave concern” expressed over the Security Forces’ counter terrorist acts.

After exhausting every possible peaceful approach to the problem, Sri Lanka still had nothing to show. By 2006, there were only two options before the Island nation. One was to allow terrorism win the day and give into demands that would never be possible democratically. The other was to eradicate terrorism once and for all.

The second option was obviously the better one. Giving into terrorism, as Sri Lanka found the hard way, does not end a problem but encourages the outrageous demands to multiply.

Fortunately, the then political arm recognised this stark truth and gave the Security Forces its wholehearted support to end terrorism from Sri Lankan soil once and for all. Unfortunately, UK refused to support Sri Lanka in this endeavour. In fact, the then British Foreign Minister, David Miliband visited in person to persuade former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to stop the military intervention. He refused and the British establishment never forgave him for it. When the latter visited the UK to deliver a speech, he was booed and heckled. This was justified by the British Government as a democratic right of the British people. Eventually, the former President had to cut short his visit as it was clear he would not be provided with adequate security.

Furthermore, every year since 2009, Britain had been part of the campaign to tarnish the military victory as a war crime. When the USA quit the UNHRC claiming it to be a political cesspit, the UK picked up the baton to play a lead role in bringing resolutions against Sri Lanka.

The fallacies of this grievance were exposed by none other than their own parliamentarian, Lord Naseby. Presenting communication that was passed from the British High Commission in Colombo with its Home Office, he proved that the British government was well aware that the allegations against Sri Lanka were false. Even after this expose, the British establishment shamelessly  continued with the charade to hound Sri Lanka on bogus war crimes.

Meghan Markle’s Platform

Meghan Markle (MM) has given the British establishment a taste of its own medicine. This has left the British media spluttering and authorities seething. All she had to do was scream racist” and she was instantly believed. This despite the well documented warm reception she received from both the British public and royal family from the time Prince Harry (or is it Just Harry”) introduced her as his life partner.

MM brazenly expected the royal family to change according to her prescriptions. As preposterous as her behaviour was, it is not a new experience for us. We too get these experts” who swoop down on us, telling us that our culture, ways and beliefs are archaic” and need to be changed as dictated. When we refuse, we too have been insulted with labels as tribal mindset”, xenophobic” and a host of other things.

It was a smart move on MM’s part to run to Oprah Winfrey with her list of complaints. Ms Winfrey’s Foundation is built on her own fight against racism, which she often attests with her own alleged experiences. For her, MM’s account thus was too juicy and resonated so well with her own fight against colour bar to listen with an open mind. Right across the US, people saw this interview conducted by a shocked Winfrey on national television.

Yet, how much of what MM stated is verifiable. For instance, she claimed a senior royal had asked her husband if he were worried about the baby’s colour”. Without establishing who said it or in what context, the entire royal family has been in one stroke painted as racist.  

Since that interview, through MM’s own antics, her credibility has nosedived. Finally, the discerning American public is waking to the fact that the British media took cudgels against MM in the first place. The British media never ridiculed MM for her colour but for her hypocrisy. Yet, the hard questions the British media threw at her were twisted by her as hounding her for her colour.

It is not only the liberties MM took with facts that is affecting her credibility. The emerging reports of ill-treating staff, her bullying tactics and intimidating those serving her has contributed as well. Yet, there is still an audience willing to ignore these hard realities on the mere premise that racism within the royal family is possible. When logic fails their argument, many personalise MM’s accusations, claiming that they too faced similar experiences.

This kind of presumption that deliberately ignores hard core facts is the most insulting and frustrating of all. Those who follow this kind of thinking and allow baseless speculation and allegations to establish do not realise the polarising effect of their actions. In effect, they contribute to the problem than resolve it.

Prince Harry’s (or Just Harry’s) role in this drama is interesting. He admits that until MM pointed out, he was unaware of his own unconscious bias”. This led him to obnoxiously trample on his birth right and family. We too have a number of ‘Just Harry’ in Sri Lanka. They come in the form of NGOs and just like ‘Just Harry’, they too expect to be paid and looked after for not wanting to be part of the Sinhala community.

For the record, the writer neither endorses MM’s behaviour, nor gloats over Britain’s discomfiture. As a protester against false propaganda, this writer’s support and sympathies are fully with Britain and her people. Nothing hurts as much as falsehoods propagated against one’s own country. However, as we can only learn from our mistakes, we in Sri Lanka hope that Britain henceforth will treat matters concerning Sri Lanka much more sensitively and allow truth to finally emerge without redacting” it.

(ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com)

By Shivanthi Ranasinghe