CLASSIFIED | POLITICS | TERRORISM | OPINION | VIEWS

Responsibility to P(ee) on the brown natives

Ramanie de Zoysa

The public statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) on the Holmes comments on Sri Lanka to Reuters, was absolutely spot-on. I congratulate the Ministry, in particular the Foreign Affairs Secretary Mr Palitha Kohona, for taking a much-needed authoritative, candid, public stand against these agents of old colonial world order.

The painfully obvious fact from this latest episode in a string of most-undignifying international ‘dignitary’ visits to Sri Lanka, is the sheer craftiness of the manevours of the individuals concerned and the most probable existence of a well rehearsed plot in support of the Tamil terror on our soil. Take for instance, the fact that Sir Holmes did not utter a word in the presence of the Sri Lankan authorities on his viewpoint (if indeed that is his viewpoint) that Sri Lanka is one of the worst places in the world for aid workers. If that is his viewpoint and he is naturally concerned about it should he not in the first instance bring it up with those who are in charge of running the country? Sir Holmes appears to have had all the top Sri Lankan authorities in one place listening to him and willing to build a working relationship with him with whom he could have discussed this issue.

The list of attendees of meetings with Sir Holmes is indeed impressive: President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Minister of Foreign Affairs Rohitha Bogollagama, Human Rights and Disaster Management Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, the Secretaries of the Ministries of Defence as well as of Foreign Affairs, a large number of officials involved with security, public administration and humanitarian affairs in Colombo, Jaffna, Batticaloa and Vakarai. Not discussing this issue at these meetings is what I would call a missed opportunity of gigantic proportions as far as Sir Holmes is concerned! Compare this with the fact that the Holmes brought up this concern with Reuters- a media outlet with a very apparent bias towards the Tamil terrorist cause! Please refer to reports on the glory, martyrdom and the bravery of LTTE cadres that seems to mesmerise some Reuters’ agents. Why would someone not talk to you about what he perceives to be your shortcoming but instead talk about it behind your back with tried and tested gossipmongers? If the motive is not smear your good name what can it be?

Further on the same point, Sir Holmes seems to have carefully selected Reuters to channel his comment through. I note that Holmes made the disparaging comments about Sri Lanka to Reuters exclusively on the 8 August but less than 24 hours later conducted an entire press conference with all other news media without mentioning a single word about it. Basically Holmes had interviews with Sri Lankan authorities on the 7 August where he did not opine Sri Lanka to be the worst in the world for humanitarian worker safety; 24 hours later he opined that to be the case in the esteemed company of Reuters and a further 24 hours later Holmes talked through an entire news conference where he did not vote Sri Lanka to be the worst in this regard. What does this do to this man’s credibility? I would say it does no good whatsoever!

The delay in publication of the Holmes’ comments by Reuters until he was well out of the country sounds like a plan ‘so cunning you could almost put a tail on it and call it a weasel’ (courtesy Mr Rowan Atkinson from Blackadder).

What this episode does to the credibility of Reuters as an international news agency is no better. Reuters are said to have been present at the meetings between Sir Holmes and the Sri Lankan authorities where he unequivocally agreed that there have been issues with the safety of humanitarian workers in Sri Lanka in the past (nothing of the magnitude that he later made public through Reuters) which have been addressed and are being satisfactorily addressed.

Quite rightly the MFA questions why Reuters never chose to allude to this comment. Why indeed? It is time, I would say, that the Sri Lankan administration took Reuters to task on this episode as well as all the previous episodes of reporting bias in favour of the Tamil terrorists and ask the Corporate centre gets a closer look at its Colombo agency. Failing a satisfactory response Sri Lanka should reward the organisation with a one-way visa out of the country. Reuters’ actions go way beyond ‘poor journalism’ as commented by MFA; this is an outright enemy operation and must be dismantled through high level talks with the Reuters International top hierarchy bypassing the grease monkeys operating at the nuts and bolts level.

Secondly, it seems imperative that the UN office in Colombo in its current form is not an outfit allowable to operate on Sri Lankan soil. MFA reports that “at the meeting Sir Holmes had with the Foreign Minister, when the Government side expressed concern that the UN had not reported 2 known cases of UN aid workers held by the LTTE, for the first time it transpired that the real figure was not two but four. In that instance Sir Holmes made it a point to note that the UN headquarters in New York had been equally agitated about the non-reporting by the UN office in Colombo of the atrocities committed to UN staff in Sri Lanka by the LTTE.” Apart from this grossly abnormal under-reporting of atrocities undeniably committed by the LTTE, the Colombo UN office has been consistently issuing adverse incorrect statements implicating the Sri Lankan government in crimes committed by LTTE and its factions.

It was on the advise of this UN office in Colombo that the ex-UN Secy General Kofi Annan expressed condolences on the demise of cold blooded killer, LTTE’s Eastern chief Kausalyan, a faux pas followed by many similar others committed by the UN top hierarchy on the advisement of its Colombo office. The fact that the UN Secretariat has ignored these mischievous acts of the Colombo office over a lengthy period means that there is a massive Tamil terrorist infiltration problem within the organisation. As a sovereign nation Sri Lanka is entitled to demand that UN makes a declaration of the backgrounds of its officials, especially those who are involved with Sri Lankan affairs. As a basic premise there is no earthly reason why the entire Colombo office of any international organisation should be manned with staff belonging to one particular ethnic identity or why it should completely avoid employing staff from the majority ethnic group. No country can afford to host proven deadly enemies on its soil and no country other than Sri Lanka continues to do so.

The irony that the Holmes visit was ‘meticulously organized’ by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in consultation with the office of the UN Under Secretary General with a view to developing a constructive and effective relationship between the UN and Sri Lanka’ will, I am sure, not be lost to the Sri Lankan authorities, MFA in particular. If reason exists to suspect UN motives Sri Lanka will have no option but to bring before the wider international community the painful but possible issue of the UN being overrun by terrorists.

Like a bad smell Holmes’ comment closely follows the comments of another international ‘expert’ Gareth Evans of Australia who rose to dizzying heights of disgraceful diplomacy with the new and fashionable phraseology R2P or ‘Responsibility to Prevent’ which has been equated with a ‘Responsibility to P(ee)’ on brown skinned natives. The overriding desire of some corners of the international community to get a foothold in Sri Lanka with a view to overriding her unity and integrity seems more and more an obvious fact rather than a figment of imagination of the ‘paranoid Sinhala chauvinists’ as the ‘peace brigade’ might suggest.

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