HUMAN INTERVENTION
By GOMIN DAYASRI
(Gomin Dayasri is a leading Sri Lankan lawyer who was a delegate to
the peace talks in Geneva with the Tamil Tigers.)
The modern concept of human rights is traced back by historians to
the establishment of war tribunals at Nuremberg by the triumphant allied
forces after defeating Germany and Japan at World War II. The war tribunals
were created to inflict punishment by the victor on the vanquished,
to try those accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes
against genocide and crimes against torture-so that history does not
repeat itself. Though these aspects form the core subjects of contemporary
human rights, in that bygone era before the creation of the United Nations,
with no discipline known as human rights or any codification - the venture
was never treated as an exercise in human rights.
After the hearing before these war tribunals more than a dozen Nazi
leaders were executed, substantial numbers were sentenced to imprisonment
while hundreds of Japanese prisoners of war were condemned to death.
On a countdown, more Asians were sentenced than Europeans on human right
violations notwithstanding the European theatre of World War II being
more extensive in duration and space and mass scale extermination of
persons on ethnicity had taken place in Europe and not in Asia. Ironically,
the western perpetrators of carnage on the Asian cities of Hiroshima
and Nagasaki in the same world war were not treated as having committed
genocide or in diplomatic terms called immoral or unethical, instead
were proclaimed as defenders and the protectors of vulnerable people,
as are those who are in the forefront of human rights campaigns today.
Human rights enforcement unfolds duplicity at the conception gradually
enlarging itself to become a self serving, self interest oriented service
with the major powers seeking dubious causes to justify entry into otherwise
forbidden territory. Human Rights in theory are laudable but dubious
in practice.
Those who died in the Twin Towers numbering around thirteen hundred
are lamented as victims of terrorism. But those thirty thousand equally
innocent Afghans who met their death on account of carpet, cluster,
gunship bombing at the hands of human rights defenders from the US and
UK are dismissed "as those unfortunate victims who happen to be
sadly in the vicinity of western gunfire engaged in human rights operations
to flush out terrorist elements". Those Afghan victims of a humanitarian
intervention are the cheapest commodity in the human rights market receiving
as aid, US $42 per person per year while their European counterparts
in Bosnia, similarly circumstanced, receive US $ 346 per person per
year. Of all the aid provided to Afghanistan on account of the damage
caused by humanitarian intervention only3% is spent on rehabilitation
and reconstruction while 84% is channeled as payment for the invasion,
establishment of military bases, training and equipping a local army.-money
which eventually flows to contractors of the west. Bosnians are more
privileged because they are Europeans waiting to join the European Union.
Humanitarian intervention is a search engine of the powerful to enter
domain of the weak in a licensed vehicle bearing the number plate human
rights. The humanitarian wars are treated as works of a civilizing force,
endeavoring to restore human rights and establish a framework for protecting
the vulnerable ostensibly in the name of freedom and democracy. In truth,
the emerging factors are more often economic and political gain and
to obtain security at home for the intruders. Human Rights interventions
are based on proximity and alignment of the threatened state to the
Greater Powers; those more distanced politically, possessing abundance
of natural resources, situated in geo- politically sensitive areas are
more exposed to danger than the intensity and the frequency of their
human right records.
Nevertheless these war trials accepted the principle of accountability
before the international community and led to a codification of a set
of rules known as the Declaration of Human Rights which was adopted
by the United Nations together with the establishment of the Human Rights
Commission which gave the global community a mechanism to confront countries
to uphold human rights. Today the officiating body is known as the Human
Rights Council together with the office of the Human Rights Commissioner
presently in the hands of Louise Arbour.
In 1993 at the Vienna Declaration on Human Rights it was stated, the
promotion and protection of all human rights is a legitimate concern
of the international community. It has no definition or a meaning and
carries no covering guarantee. It was worded in the abstract, not as
a legal obligation. International law is a series of treaties, customs
and conventions which the sovereign states are required to respect and
as ruled by our Supreme Court requires domestic statue laws to support
international obligations where implementation and enforcement is sought.
The principles enunciated in the Declaration of Human Rights are sourced
to the British Magna Carta, the French Declaration of the Rights of
Man and United States Bill of Rights. Western commentators trace these
rights to the Greek philosopher Aristotle who extended freedom and liberty
to male city dwellers but excluded women and slaves. More sprawling
in character was the work Emperor Ashoka who in the third century BC
covered his kingdom with stone inscriptions that extended rights to
women and slaves and insisted that these rights must be enjoyed by the
forest people living far away from the cities.
Subsequent to the Treaty of Westphalia, which ended the 30 year war
in 1648 there evolved a tradition of an interstate system under which
it was deemed that one nation should not infringe upon another's national
territory or interfere in another's internal affairs. The entire globe
was demarcated, as exhibited on the world map, under the control of
existing states except the Antarctica, where claims are still being
lodged. The UN charter, adopted in 1945 explicitly recognized the central
principle of the interstate system which is known as the Westphalia
doctrine. This was given effect in the United Nations Charter in Article
2(7) which stated "nothing contained in the present Charter shall
authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially
within the domestic jurisdiction of any state". Though sovereign
states are unequal in terms of power wealth and resources the UN declarations
have affirmed that "all states enjoy sovereign equality. They have
equal rights and duties and are equal members of the international community
notwithstanding differences of an economic, social political or other
nature". The official commentary to the UN document further supplements
the Charter with the declaration. 'No state or group of states has the
right to intervene, directly or indirectly for any reason whatever,
in the internal or external affairs of any other state. Consequently,
armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted
threats against the personality of the state against its political,
economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law'.
Nevertheless, every sovereign state possesses according to the UN charter
"an inherent right of individual or collective self defense if
an armed attack occurs" and such self preservation requires some
degree of military or political intervention in the affairs of the offensive
state. A near example within living memory would in June 1967 when the
Israeli air force struck several Arab states and destroyed their air
fleets on the ground as Arab states had declared and prepared to launch
an offensive operation against Israel.
Notwithstanding the sovereignty of states and acceptance of the Westphalia
doctrine by the international community, interventions have taken place
in several forms since World War II. American fear of the "red
peril of communism" led to several covert and overt interventions
such as;
- the Bay of Pigs in Cuba to overthrow Fidel Castro;
- intrusion into Indo- China of Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos to eliminate
the growth of North Vietnamese influence with its close links to Soviet
Russia;
- supported the Contras in Nicaragua to overthrow the elected Sandinista
government of Daniel Ortega on account of its alliance with Fidel
Castro and the implementation of socialist policies;
- entered Granada in the West Indies to eliminate the left oriented
Government of Maurice Bishop which was conceived as a communist threat
on America's backyard;
- a coup was enacted to dislodge the democratically elected government
of Salvador Allende in Chile for nationalizing and introducing land
reform affecting American interest and followed by the immediate installation
of a military dictator in Pinochet who was responsible for the largest
amount of atrocities in the western hemisphere after the Second World
War.;
- military and economic support was extended to Suharto's militarily
rule in Indonesia which killed more than half a million people with
left leanings .
America was not the sole offender as states with political colorations
ranging from communism to socialism intruded into the territory of weaker
states. There was the invasion of China into Tibet and dislodgement
of the then existing religious regime of the lamas; the sacking of the
Kampuchean government of murderous Pol Pot by the Vietnamese forces
and setting up a puppet regime in Phom Penh.
India's military machine entered East Pakistan with the intention
of bifurcating Pakistan and with it the creation of the new state of
Bangladesh. There was also the episode of Russian tanks rolling into
Hungary to crush a rebellion in a communist regime; Russians extended
their military into Afghanistan which unpopular course of action enabled
the Taliban to take over the government; Tanzania invaded Uganda to
overthrow Idi Amin; Russians destroyed the capital of Grozny in the
Muslim republic of Chechnya where the civilian population had to move
to the neighboring republics to pitch tent and live in refugee camps.
The underlined emerging factor is that militarily stronger nations
irrespective of their political leanings were able to overcome the weaker
nations notwithstanding the provisions in the UN charter, principles
of international law, treaties and customs and conventions Though the
USA has been far the chief offender, states with different political
complexions have made similar interventions. It is a case of might being
right and the winner takes all in exercise to enhance power or stability
in the region or simply to loot the resources of another.
With the end of the Cold War the threat of communism receded and intervention
took a new look in the form of narcotics wars. A military invasion by
the US army, the largest since Vietnam was displayed in Panama to dismantle
drug cartels associated with General Noriega known to have being once
an agent of CIA but fell foul of the US who arrested the General and
indicted him in the United States on drug charges. During this period
the US government intervened in Colombia, a haven of drug barons and
in Bolivia on drug related issues which finally led to an indigenous
coca farmer Eva Morales being popularly elected as the President and
to become a close disciple of Hugo Chavez. Here again the narcotics
was a respectable front to dominate the south of America where revolutionary
movements were gaining ground much to the dismay of the United States.
Interventions by states are not necessarily of armed nature initially
pressure is applied in a subtle manner- to name a few-Washington offered
support to the Kosovo Liberation Army an armed Muslim militia group
that was opposed to the Serbs before the NATO intervention began purely
to weaken the Serbian army before entering Yugoslavia. India airlifted
food supplies to the North violating the territorial integrity of Sri
Lanka to show their hostility to policies of the then government of
Sri Lanka before the Indian army landed on the island. Initially, Iraq
was subject to UN sanctions to punish Saddam Hussein but hardships of
shortages were felt by ordinary people with whom West later sympathized
by offering them to provide a democratic alternative by conquering Iraq
and making it a hell hole. Presently the West spends US $ 15 million
on Persian language broadcasts to undermine government of Iran by propagating
hostile messages to the local population before the intended invasion.
Often before a physical intervention there is an initial softening to
test the waters by supporting causes hostile to existing regimes in
the country of the intended intervention.
The cloak of human rights for the purpose of intervention is a more
recent invention of western paternalism enabling intrusion into societies
not under western sponsorship such as Bosnia, Sudan, Somalia, Haiti,
Sierra Leone East Timor, Congo, Iraq, Kosovo Afghanistan, and Cambodia.
A unique feature on examination of the listed countries is that the
turf is prepared for the human rights interventions always to weaker
and underdeveloped states based on the philosophy of John Stuart Mills
that the "civilizing imperialism of western powers could help to
protect the rights of the oppressed and backward elsewhere in the world".
The case for human rights is based on the premise that in an increasingly
globalize world there is the emergence of a universal citizen and human
rights are on the same platform as international terrorism, drug trafficking,
ozone depletion and HIV aids. De facto rule over a territory by a state
is no longer held to legitimize the denial of justice and human rights
which must be decided by an objective outsider. An elected government
should no longer have the final say on what constitutes justice and
rights of its own citizens. An act of war is said to be justifiable
to defend human rights that are felt to under threat or to have been
extensively violated. These military operations are deemed in the West
as moral and ethical when conflicts occur between or within non western
states.
The western powers carried a declared humanitarian war in Yugoslavia
in a bid to protect the Albanian population from alleged Serbian persecutions
within state boundaries. NATO warplanes conducted a 78 days air war
which decimated the infrastructure of the country but the ethnic conflicts
still continues to simmer. Already fragile boundaries after the war
fragmented the country into several more states which was a European
design to carve up the state of Yugoslavia once the vanguard of the
non- aligned movement under Marshall Tito. These mini states of the
former Yugoslavia are desirous of seeking admission to the European
Union-undoubtedly an attractive proposition to western interest.
The next humanitarian adventure of the Western powers was the entry
to Afghanistan to drive away a Taliban government on the pretext of
violating the freedom of the Afghan people and introducing democracy
but more weighted were the security concerns after September 11 and
seeking a base to dominate Central Asia with new states emerging with
the disintegration of Soviet Russia. The entry into Iraq was again on
publicized humanitarian considerations such as providing people with
freedom and democracy including the elimination of the non existing
Weapons of Mass Destruction and the hunger thirst for the sprawling
oil fields.
The Western presence has caused more deaths and destruction than in
period of Saddam Hussein and intensified ethnic strife between the Sunnis
and the Shiites. All the wars fought in the name of human rights in
Yugoslavia Afghanistan and Iraq were fought on extraneous causes taking
priority over the sovereign rights of a nation state or the human rights
of the people. These conflicts demonstrate the triumph of the new doctrine
of human rights over sovereignty notwithstanding the breach of international
law as these military campaigns were conducted without UN Security Council
authorization.
The justification was on the basis that democracy freedom and human
rights were being restored. But these same western powers failed to
recognize Hamas when it was democratically elected at an election that
was declared free and fair and these champions of human rights punished
the Palestinian voters for exercising their democratic rights by freezing
funds and imposing sanctions on their economic necessities. Elections
have been held in Iraq, Afghanistan East Timor, Kosovo and Bosnia but
power still resides with the high priests of the invading forces without
transferring it to the democratically elected representatives giving
impetus to the theory that the western powers are engaged in a subdued
but effective form of human rights colonialism where they are no prepared
to surrender their economic gains obtained in occupied territory. The
powers that entered these countries have remained indefinitely.
A remarkable feature is that in the past peace activists of the past
who launched massive anti war demonstrations against wars conducted
by powerful states of the west which made such an impact as to make
America withdraw from Vietnam are now replaced by the NGO's as peace
missionaries specializing in conflict resolution and peace education
and in their curriculum humanitarian wars are an acceptable proposition.
Therefore NGO activists such as Amnesty International, Medicine without
Borders, Human Rights Watch are strong supporters of these humanitarian
wars conducted by the Western Powers just as much are the political
forces of the Social Democratic Left of European politics who have become
the high priests of intervention. They have set their ethical agenda
of human rights to portrait barbaric aspects of human nature reside
in economically backward societies of the non western world which has
to be countered by just and honorable humanitarian military action of
the western states.
Yet, during the Rwandan civil war, hundreds of thousands of men, women
and children from Tutsi tribes were slaughtered by rival Hutus militias
yet the American administration of Clinton refused to intervene but
also influenced the UN Security Council to mandate the withdrawal of
UN peacekeepers from Rwanda and block efforts to redeploy them. The
subsequent catastrophe turned out to be such an embarrassment to the
Washington administration that Clinton in 1998 made a formal apology
in the face of the angry voices of condemnation on the ground they did
not fully appreciate the reality situation. It appears both America
and Russians are closing their eyes and ears to the human rights violations
of each other while paying attention to the human rights violations
of the others-otherwise how else could gulags of terror be established
on foreign soil while preaching human rights at home.
The image of Pol Pot still lingers on as the Field Marshall of killing
fields of Cambodia which accounted for the most grotesque forms of human
rights violations in Asia but yet when his government was ousted by
the Vietnamese forces and he took sanctuary in the jungles of Thailand;
the UN on the instigation of the western powers decided to recognize
Pol Pot wearing the butches apron in the jungle rather than the government
in Phnom Penh with years in office.
The UN recognition for Pol Pot meant international aid could not flow
to the Cambodian people by the UNDP and allied UN agencies and health
facilities could not be provided by the WHO to a country where by Western
estimates 600000 had been killed previously by American carpet bombing
when the US decided to destroy the Ho Chin Mihn trail which ferried
supplies to Vietnam across Cambodia .It was the US bombing that enabled
Pol Pot to come to power and led to the slaughter of two million people.
The Cambodians were reeling under a double blow from the Americans and
Pol Pot, became the only country on the planet denied aid and assistance
due to UN continuing to recognize an ousted Pol Pot.
To make it worse the US government decided to supply arms and the
UN supplied food and seed convoys to the ousted Pol Pot the worst offender
of human rights in Asia living in the jungles off Thailand while making
preparations to re enter Cambodia. There was a common plank - Americans
had killed a million Cambodians in a secret war that was not known to
the American people or the Congress and Pol Pot had eliminated 1/3 of
the Cambodian population.
The role of the Human Rights Commission now headed by Louise Arbour
on Cambodia is more bewildering as it refused to consider a report of
955 pages of testimony on mass violation of Human Rights in Cambodia.
For 10 more years UN rejected all efforts by the Cambodian government
to bring Khmer Rouge leaders to justice and from all official documentation
at the Peace Talks at Paris where the UN was a participant, phrases
such as 'crimes against 'humanity' and 'genocide' were deleted from
the script to allow Pol Pot to gain recognition and respectability.
The background was that Western Powers were anxious to enter the Chinese
market at the relevent time, ASEAN nations were keen to pander to China
who was supporting Pol Pot because a pro Vietnamese government was in
office in Phnom Penh; and the Americans were still smarting after been
defeated by the Vietnamese who were clients of Russia in a period the
cold war was still in progress between America and Russia. It was 30
years later in guilt and shame that UN were prepared to hold a tribunal
to investigate human rights crimes in Cambodian, and the chief culprit
Khieu Samphan the political face of the Khmer Rogue was arrested by
the Genocide Tribunal on Monday this week. Pol Pot was permitted to
die peacefully in Thailand after having remarried. It was the pressure
exerted by the western powers that saved the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot
from any form of inquiry for 30 years which reveals the extent the UN
Human Rights Commission is manipulated by the desires of the Western
Powers.
Finally let me examine the facts that attract intervention
in Sri Lanka.
Firstly, we have allowed every prime issue to be internationalized
from good governance to conflict resolution, poverty alleviation to
forest conservation. This has brought the NGO caravans who have now
pitched tent and become the mouth piece and the reporting authority
to international forums.
Secondly, as an independent country without any alignment to any power
block we are without a sponsor or guarantor .We also present our case
poorly before international forums
Thirdly, we have by following incorrect policies made our country economically
backward while holding untapped energy sources under the sea bed and
being strategically situated in the major sea lanes attractive to predators.
Fourthly, due to poor governance, mismanagement, corruption, inefficiency
and unstable political alignments attempts may be made to portrait us
as a failed state.
Fifthly, our inability to control a terrorist movement which is causing
wanton damage and the reluctance to examine and consider the relief
that can be given to the legitimate grievances of the minorities.
Sixthly, in our midst is an elite society who are inviting intervention
to improve their way of live which cannot be achieved due to lack of
public support for causes they peddle
How do we overcome these obstacles?
Firstly-the foreign NGO's must be scrutinized and if discovered to
be against national security should be expelled.
Secondly-the state must involve patriotic persons with skill, dedication
and motivation to present Sri Lanka's case before international forums
and not restrict to politicians and administrators who have not been
successful.
Thirdly we must urgently attend to minority grievances within a unitary
concept. Otherwise a tinkering of the constitution will be required
which may not receive the sanction of the people at a referendum and
the problem will continue to fester.
Fourthly, have an effective internal mechanism to check and stricture
on human rights by establishing a genuinely independent Human Rights
Commission with men of integrity, strength and wisdom. For example in
Pakistan in the province Baluch where Pakistan's natural resources are
located a terrorist movement has been in operation for years seeking
an independent state and where the Pakistan forces have been involved
in aerial and land skirmishes. Pakistan has not permitted to permit
the issue to be internationalized issue and it is virtually unknown
to the NGO community. The main reason is because the Pakistan Human
Rights Commission has acted independently and has not been afraid to
stricture the government and the terrorists and recommended remedial
measures.
Fifthly, to demonstrate positively our strengths of a vibrant democracy,
independent judiciary and enforceable fundamental rights, active media,
political dissent, high rate of literacy, universal health care and
most significantly the government providing facilities to persons in
areas under terrorist control and infrastructural benefits
Sixthly, the most important factor is to build public opinion against
international intervention and motivate the public to rally against
such possible intervention. Fortunately patriotic causes have always
had public support which has been contrary to the elitist thinking in
Colombo, which has saved the country. The silent majority has always
being with the patriotic forces and the critical requirement for the
present is to provide an enlightened leadership and lead the people
with moderation. Historically where proper leadership was given the
people have given their overwhelming support.
|
