CLASSIFIED | POLITICS | TERRORISM | OPINION | VIEWS

Response to CRS Report Code RL31707

SRI LANKA UNITED NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
Box 55292, 300 Borough Drive, Toronto, Ontario, M1P 4Z7 Canada
Website: www.sluna.org E-mail: sluna@idirect.com

Dear Senators and Congressmen,

CRS REPORT TO THE US CONGRESS - Order Code RL31707:

1.) 2002 Ceasefire and LTTE's perceived objectives:

a) The summary section, para 2, states that the LTTE agreed to autonomy in 2002 when it proposed a ceasefire and peace talks. Although it was assumed that they would settle for something less than a separate state which they sought, they did not make any such pronouncement publicly. In fact, Prabhakaran in his first interview to the media later that year, told his cadres that they could kill him if he wavers from the goal of a separate "Eelam". This statement in the summary section of the CRS Report is merely an interpretation based on conjecture.

b) Para 2 of the summary also states that the GOSL and the LTTE agreed in principle to seek a solution through a federal structure at the Oslo round of talks held in October 2003. The correct position is that they agreed to 'explore' means of reaching a settlement through a federal structure as announced by the Norwegian peace facilitator and the host of the Oslo talks. This was later refuted by the LTTE's chief delegate, Anton Balasingham, who idirectly stated that the LTTE had not given up their separatist goal. In para 3, the retaliatory military action launched by the government forces following the stoppage of drinking and irrigation water to farming communities by the LTTE from the Mavilaru in July 2006 and ongoing military clashes, have been wrongly interpreted as leading to full-scale civil war. Majority of the Tamil civilian population have chosen to live in government controlled areas where they are free to live without threat of harm, extortion, or other restrictions, which clearly goes to show that there is no civil strife, but merely that the authorities have taken military measures to weaken and overcome the Tamil Tiger Terrorists who continue to resort to violence to achieve their separatist aims.

2.) Power Sharing Arrangement:

a) Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Mr. Richard Boucher, who visited Sri Lanka in May 2007 had conveyed to the Sri Lankan leaders that the US expects the All Party Representatives Conference (APRC) to reach a consensus that identifies for the Tamil
community their role in the island, their place, their control over various levels of government and their own lives, as the best basis for future progress toward conflict resolution. In our view, the solution has to be determined by the people of Sri Lanka and not dictated to by any foreign power. The members of the Tamil community enjoy the same rights as the rest of Sri Lanka's citizens belonging to the other ethnic communities.

In fact, the minority Tamils have enjoyed the right to free education in the Tamil language from the kindergarten to the university throughout the post independent period. Furthermore, Tamil linguistic rights have progressively been enhanced with recognition as a National Language and language of administration in Tamil dominated areas of the north and east in 1978, just 22 years following the switch from English spoken by 5 percent to Sinhala spoken by 78 percent of the population in 1956. Today, Tamil has been elevated as an official language on par with Sinhala spoken by the majority. The role and place of the Tamils as regards the constitutional provisions is not second to any one, as they are equal citizens enjoying the same rights as the rest of the population.

Their standing certainly has been affected to some degree due to the confrontational approach adopted by the Tamil community, both in the pre-independent and post-independent period in Sri Lanka's recent history, as they pursued a separatist path to safeguard the special privileges bestowed to this community by the British colonial regime under the latter's divide and rule policy, instead of attempting to cooperate and work with the majority Sinhalese community which held political power.

b) The solution does not lie as Mr. Boucher suggests in establishing new levels of government based on ethnicity to be controlled by the Tamils. It is our firm belief, as Canadians or Americans of Sri Lankan origin, that the solution lies in accommodating not only the Tamils but the rest of the minority communities including the Muslims, the Indian Tamils. etc. in playing an integral role in
the formulation of policy, planning, implementing and monitoring of accepted programs by representation in special legislative/advisory committees in each of the ministries of the Central Government, thereby participating with the majority Sinhala community in the day to day governance of the common homeland of Sri Lanka within a within a unitary system. We do not see the need for extensive devolution to the periphery beyond adequate powers being devolved to district councils, which are currently geared to carry out the administration of government through district secretariats. This would permit the Tamils to control 3 district councils comprising Jaffna, Mullaitivu and Batticaloa where they form a majority.

c) The provincial boundaries are merely lines drawn by the British colonialists across the map of Sri Lanka to demarcate administrative units, and not based on any historical, river basin model or other
criteria. Ethnically based semi-autonomous regions would tend to create artificial barriers, and would definitely impinge on the degree of ethnic harmony and unity that is needed for a viable and stable peace in the island of Sri Lanka. The alternative proposal made here would help the different communities to work together in multi-ethnic legislative committees at the centre, whilst managing directly related concerns of the particular ethnic community at the district level where significantly large segments of that community may reside.

The district is better suited than the much larger province to accommodate the regional ethnic, cultural and social variations present in the country, and therefore deemed the most suitable peripheral unit. The solution should seek to balance the legitimate aspirations of all communities and not shift the scales to appease only the Tamils at the expense of the rest.

3.) History and Population Statistics:

a) In CRS-3, it has been stated that Indo-Aryans established the Sinhala Buddhist Kingdoms in the 5th century BCE in the central part of the island. This is not exactly correct, as the migrants from Northern India together with the indigenous Hela people established the Sinhala nation with its first capital in the north central city of Anuradhapura and held sway over all parts of the island.

The Tamils from South India first arrived as invaders to pillage and plunder in the 4th century BCE. They succeeded in holding on to small pockets of territory for very short periods, but were defeated and driven back on every occasion. After the heroic King Dutugemunu defeated the Tamil King Elara's forces, Sri Lanka (Sinhale) escaped further invasions from South India for almost 14 centuries.

b) Tamils arrived as settlers from Southern India only around the 11th century to take up residence in the Jaffna peninsula. More Tamils arrived as indentured labour brought in by the Dutch colonialists in the 18th century for work on tobacco plantations in the north and east. The British colonialists also brought in Tamils as indentured labour in the 19th and 20th century for work on coffee, tea and cocoa plantations in the central hill country, who are referred to as Indian Tamils.

c) The Tamil population is given as 12 percent, whereas the statistics quoted from the CIA World Factbook gives the number as 9.4 percent in 2001 having adjusted for the nearly 800,000 to 1 million Tamils who have emigrated to the developed western countries. Out of the remaining 9.4 percent Sri Lankan Tamils, 55 percent of this group lives outside the north and east in mixed ethnic surroundings, leaving a balance of roughly 4.2 percent resident in the northern and eastern provinces. These two provinces together comprise about 1/3rd of the island's land and 2/3rd of the coastline, adjacent sea and economic zone, which the LTTE seeks as a separate state to be under the control of the Tamil community.

d) The Sinhalese population in 2001 is given as 82 percent residing in all parts of the island except the northern province following the forced eviction of the remaining 23,000 residents just prior to 1981. The Sinhalese have accommodated the other minority communities who live and work amidst them, but are barred from Tamil dominated areas in the north and east by militant Tamils.

Although they are the majority community in the island with a written history dating back to 2600 years, they are a regional minority as the Tamils of Sri Lanka and the 60 million ethnically, linguistically and culturally linked Tamils of Tamilnadu South India, completely outnumber the 14 million Sinhalese who have no other homeland. Any division of their only homeland would result in untold violence far worse than what took place during the partition of India in 1947, with forced eviction on both sides of the resulting hostile border, followed by a prolonged conflict that would destabilise the whole region.

4.) Political Setting ( CRS - 4):

Following independence in 1948, the government was compelled to take steps to provide opportunities to the vast majority of people numbering nearly 95 percent, who had been neglected by the British colonial regime for a period of over 150 years, by depriving them of access to education in the English medium, which prevented them from acquiring gainful employment for lack of knowledge of an alien language.

The government was forced to switch from English spoken by 5 % of the people to the Sinhala language spoken by 78 % of the population as the official language in 1956, whilst providing for the reasonable use of the Tamil language, and guaranteeing free education in Tamil from the kindergarten to the university level. Public servants from all communities including Sinhalese who were not able to function in the official language were given time to acquire the necessary language skills, or retire with full pension rights. The Tamils who retired with full pension rights were able to work in the expanding private sector which continued to function in English. The Tamils who now had to have a working knowledge of the new official language for employment in the Public Service by learning Sinhala to serve the mostly non-English speaking people, considered it discriminatory against their community.

The policy of standardization introduced in 1972 to provide opportunities for students in districts with sparse educational facilities to gain admission to universities by lowering the required marks in their case, as compared to students from schools with superior facilities, was aimed at helping students in rural Sri Lanka to also qualify for higher education. It was not intended to discriminate against any particular community, as Sinhalese students in urban centres such as Colombo, Kandy, Galle, Matara, Moratuwa, Kurunegala, etc. were similarly affected, just like the Tamil students from Jaffna and Batticaloa. Here again the Tamils claimed that it was a measure brought in to restrict the number of Tamil university graduates. It was intended as an interim affirmative action program to help students in both Sinhala and Tamil rural areas to have opportunities to gain admission to the very few universities available in the island, till such time as the standards in the rural schools could be elevated. This too was considered discriminatory against the Tamils, which is often quoted as one of the main issues giving rise to the ongoing conflict.

5. CRS - 8 on JVP and Norwegian Role:

The report has wrongly interpreted the JVP uprising in the early 1970's as a terrorist campaign against Tamils in the central and southern regions. It was an uprising staged by youth educated in
Sinhala many of whom had university degrees, who were unable to find employment in a stagnant economy caused by a near tripling of the price of petroleum, leading to serious balance of payments problems faced by the country dependant on the export of her agricultural products, the prices of which remained static. They were led by Marxist oriented youth who had received their higher education in the former communist controlled USSR and North Korea, who sought to overthrow the elected government and form a socialist government based on Marxist policies. It was not directed at the Tamils as stated in the report, but aimed at grabbing power through violent means. The JVP insurgency was short lived, as the government was able to take timely action to crush the uprising.

The statement attributed to the Norwegian General heading the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) to the effect that there was "no significant difference in the gravity" of the truce and human rights by either side, clearly shows the partiality displayed by the Norwegians to the LTTE from the very outset, commencing with the signing of the ceasefire documents which we have commented on earlier. It is absurd to equate 4200 violations on the part of the LTTE during the five year ceasefire which includes the murder of several hundred Tamils considered dissidents, killing of 40 Sri Lankan military intelligence personnel by their pistol gang, assassination of Sri Lanka's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hon. Lakshman Kadirgamar, suicide bomb attack killing Tamil intellectual and human rights advocate Neelan Tiruchelvam, ethnic cleansing attacks on Sinhalese and Muslims in the east, attempted suicide attack on Minister Douglas Devananda, extortion, threats, assaults, abductions, torture and a long list of crimes, as against nearly 160 violations ruled against the government forces which related mainly to harassment of persons at military checkpoints. The SLMM shielded the LTTE by blaming the sinking of a Chinese owned vessel on contract to the Sri Lankan Government for carrying essential cargo for civilians in the north on an "unknown third party", whereas a taped telephone conversation between the SLMM head and the LTTE chief revealed the collusion and true position, showing that the SLMM was not an impartial monitor that could be trusted in the role of peace facilitation.

The Norwegian Peace Facilitator has supplied high powered communications equipment brought in as diplomatic cargo to the LTTE, provided funds and banking facilities in contravention of the UN conventions on terrorism. They have given diplomatic assistance to open doors for members of this terrorist group to meet with senior elected representatives and officials in European capitals. There has also been an unethical relationship between the LTTE and Eric Solheim who handled the peace facilitation, giving cause for many observers to conclude that Norway was more a collaborator of the LTTE than an impartial peace facilitator.

5.) Human Rights Violations:

a) The Government of Sri Lanka with its limited armed forces is required to guard elected leaders, vital installations and at the same time prevent the armed terrorist cadres belonging to the Tamil Tigers from infiltrating into population centres and causing any damage. The forces are also deployed in the Jaffna peninsula to defend Sri Lanka's sovereignty and territorial integrity. They also need to hold the line between the cleared areas and other regions of of the Northern Vanni and eastern province dominated by the armed LTTE, referred to as the un-cleared areas.

b) Under the terms of the lopsided ceasefire agreement drawn up by the Norwegian Peace Facilitators, which unlike normal accords was first presented for signature to the LTTE and thereafter submitted to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe by-passing the President who was the head of state, who was then asked to sign the agreement or forego the opportunity to bring about a ceasefire and a negotiation process towards a settlement of the conflict.

It was lopsided in that the LTTE cadres were allowed to enter the cleared areas whilst the people in the rest of the country were prevented from entering into the un-cleared areas dominated by the LTTE. The main highway going north through the un-cleared areas which was to be open for free flow of traffic was barred by the LTTE, which set up a barricade to levy unauthorized taxes tantamount to extortion of funds especially from Tamils using the road to visit family members living in the northern Jaffna peninsula.

c) The LTTE made use of the ceasefire to re-arm by smuggling in shiploads of weapons and re-build its forces by abducting children and adults as reported on by HRW, Amnesty and Unicef. Despite undertakings given to the UN's Rapporteur, Mr. Olara Otunnu, the LTTE did not honour its agreement to release its child soldiers which was considered a war crime. This was followed by similar undertakings given to the UNICEF, yet the LTTE continued to recruit more child soldiers, but for a token 45 children who were released to the care of Unicef, out of a total of over 6000 child recruits. This is a black mark against the world body which utterly failed to intervene on behalf of the abducted children forced to join the LTTE's armed forces as storm troopers in unceasing waves of attacks launched against the governments forces, ending up in graves spread throughout the north and east.

d) With the schism in the LTTE in 2004 after which Colonel Karuna, the Special Commander of the LTTE's eastern region left with 6000 cadres, the human rights situation in the east deteriorated considerably due to the bitter enmity between the two factions. Colonel Karuna initially released 2000 child recruits in his ranks, but subsequently has been engaged in re-recruiting some of the released children estimated at 295 for active duty to defend his faction from the main LTTE group that seeks to liquidate his armed cadres and civilian supporters. Much of the human rights violations have arisen as a result of this bitter dispute.

It remained an enormous task for the government to deal with the situation in the jungle terrain controlled by the LTTE and Col. Karuna's men with parts of the territory being barred to the GOSL forces under the Ceasefire Agreement. With the eastern province being re-taken from LTTE and liberating the captive civilian population from the clutches of the Tamil Tigers who used them as human shields, the human rights situation has vastly improved in that region.

e) The international human rights agencies such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty, International Crisis Group, western governments and the UNHCHR have been mainly focussing attention on the killing of 17 aid workers employed by the French Aid Agency, Action Against Hunger in Muttur in August 2006. The former head of the Nordic Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission accused the Sri Lankan Security Forces of having killed the 17 aid workers (16 Tamils and 1 Muslim) at their office in Muttur in execution style, without having conducted any inquiry, and merely basing his conclusion on so called reliable sources whom he has failed to disclose.

f) On examination of the facts, it is clear that the SLMM has hastily jumped to wrong conclusions. The LTTE troops that cut off water in July 2006 to paddy farmers by shutting off the water from the Mavil Aru were forcibly dislodged by the GOSL forces. Thereupon, the LTTE which had publicly stated that it was launching the final war to carve out a separate state of "Eelam", made a lightning strike on the Muttur Town and occupied the area till the 5th of August 2006. According to the LTTE's Tamilnet Website, the LTTE forces made a tactical withdrawal from Muttur only on August 5th. The same LTTE website was the first to report of the dastardly killing of the 17 aid workers in Muttur, which they blamed on the GOSL forces who re-took the town on August 5, 2006, in order to create a serious human rights situation that would cause much embarrassment to the GOSL and a great deal of anger directed at it by HR agencies and foreign governments.

Subsequent investigations carried out by the Judicial Medical Officer has revealed that the aid workers had died either around midnight of August 3rd or the early hours of August 4, 2006, whilst Muttur still remained under the control of the LTTE as reported in the Tamilnet website. Forensic tests done on the exhumed bodies with the help of Australian Forensic Experts have brought forth 8 bullet casings of which 7 clearly matched with those shells used by the LTTE's forces deemed to be 7.62 calibre bullets. The Australian expert initially thought that just one single bullet casing was of the 5.62 calibre type used by the GOSL forces and other parties as well. The Sri Lankan investigators maintained that all 8 casings were of the 7.62 calibre type, leading to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) to allege foul play on the part of the Sri Lankan authorities in their Press Release of June 25, 2007, suggesting that the disputed casing had been substituted with one of the 7.62 calibre type to implicate the LTTE.

The Australian Forensic Expert, Dr. Malcolm Dodd, who initially disagreed with his Sri Lankan counterparts in the assessment of the calibre of the disputed bullet casing now confirms that the bullet is of the same calibre as the other seven (7.62 calibre) as previously determined by the GOSL forensic personnel. This leaves one to conclude that the aid workers had been deliberately done to death by the LTTE prior to retreating from Muttur with the intention of pinning the blame on the government's security forces.

6.) Conclusion:

Given the complexity of the terrorist problem faced by the Government of Sri Lanka in fighting an armed group that had developed ground forces numbering in the range of 10 to 15 thousand, a suicide squad called the Black Tigers, a navy and a small air force, plus an international network to raise funds through legal and illicit means for procurement of weapons estimated at $300 million yearly by Jane's Intelligence, is no mean task, considering the limited resources available to the state. It has been an enormous duty to prevent human rights violations and to effectively deal with perpetrators who had the ability to slip back into the un-cleared areas held by the LTTE.

The situation has been further complicated by the armed conflict that has extended over 24 years with some weapons getting into the hands of criminal elements who have used the situation to recently abduct persons with substantial wealth to demand ransoms for their release.The government was able to crackdown on the criminal gangs and bring this under control, and even expose the involvement of businessmen within the minority communities who had engaged in such criminal activity. It was also revealed that several persons had falsely claimed threats of abduction to make a case to seek immigration to developed countries. Others too who were reported as missing persons had also been found, as they attempted to avoid personal obligations such as promise of marriage or repayment of funds advanced to them.

The bitter rivalry between the various Tamil groups that entered the democratic stream and the LTTE which claims to be the sole representative of the Tamil community has also contributed to numerous human rights violations, as the LTTE tends to target the others deemed as dissidents to maintain their leadership position.

The pressure brought by the human rights agencies, foreign funded NGO, INGO, foreign governments, UNHCHR, by suspending or cutting off aid to Sri Lanka and demanding the stationing of observers when the very same organizations are permitted to freely enter the country and study the ground situation, tends to give a boost to the terrorist LTTE in pursuing their military objectives unhindered by the international community. Furthermore, when the international community has given scant regard and very low priority to preventing the LTTE from raising funds within their respective jurisdictions despite designating them as terrorists, we are left to assume that the international community merely pays lip service to its international obligations in terms of the UN Conventions on Terrorism including the Suspension of Financing of Terrorism, but uses its big stick against Sri Lanka which is fighting alone with its back to the wall to safeguard her sovereignty, territorial integrity and civilian population from continued destabilizing effect as a result of three decades of violence carried out by the Tamil Tiger Terrorists.

The LTTE is a terrorist outfit which does not represent the Tamil community, which has mercilessly liquidated other militant and moderate Tamils to take on the self-declared mantle of 'sole representative of the Tamil community'. The majority of those cadres of the LTTE are considered low on the Tamil Hindu Caste system who have recently become Catholics, thereby benefiting from the propaganda and influence wielded by the Catholic Church, with several leading catholic clergy holding senior positions within the LTTE network. Sri Lanka has on her Statute Book, The Prevention of Social Disabilities Act of 1957 which was amended in 1971 with stronger measures, and further revised by the Fundamental Rights Chapter of the Second Republican Constitution of 1978 to deal with social discrimination issues. Growing fears are the shadowy ties being developed by the LTTE with the 11 million Dalits in Tamilnadu called Untouchables, who are also being pressured to become Catholics, which could further endanger the security of the region.

We appeal to the leaders of the United States of America and the rest of the international community to help Sri Lanka to defeat the terrorists and establish law and order throughout the land, which will result in the curbing of human rights violations in the same manner, as currently prevailing in the eastern province which has since been cleared of terrorist elements of the LTTE responsible for subjugating the civilian population through terror and violence. Once the terrorist forces have been put out of action, Sri Lanka will be able to fully restore law and order together with peace and prosperity for all of her citizens.

We trust that you would urgently re-assess your decision to impose restrictive measures against Sri Lanka based on questionable evidence. We seek America's cooperation to bring back liberty, justice and the fruits of freedom, which we all hold dear, to all the people of Sri Lanka.

Yours very truly,

Mahinda Gunasekera
Honorary President

Dated: November 5, 2007

Disclaimer: The comments contained within this website are personal reflection only and do not necessarily reflect the views of the LankaWeb. LankaWeb.com offers the contents of this website without charge, but does not necessarily endorse the views and opinions expressed within. Neither the LankaWeb nor the individual authors of any material on this Web site accept responsibility for any loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which you may directly or indirectly suffer arising out of your use of or reliance on information contained on or accessed through this Web site.
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfer and do not necessarily represent those of LankaWeb.com. .

BACK TO LATEST NEWS

DISCLAIMER