The UN and Mohan Samaranayake
Which is The Greater Crime-Hypocrisy of a World Body or Patriotism of an Individual?

By Ramani D.Wickramaratne

UN we believe is the world body that supposedly is the champion of all member countries facing a crisis-be it floods, poverty, drought, health hazards like HIV/AIDS, education, housing, transport or terrorism. What we have been made to believe is that the UN is an impartial and neutral World Body that stretches its hands out to those countries in distress. Well and good, and we do like to believe this is truly so. However, experience and situations world wide, have proved that the UN is anything but impartial or neutral and that it has failed to live up to the expectations of the world. It has proved more than once, that it is ever willing to cow down to the pressures from the USA or other western countries while using sanctions, and "arm-twisting tactics" when handling situations in the so called "Third World" or "Developing Countries" where white supremacy tries to use "cow boy tactics" of high-handedness to subjugate and dictate terms overlooking all cultural, socio-economic or religious fabric of those countries.

We do like to think that the UN also employs staff with impeccable track records both at a personal as well as professional level. Even in this, developing countries have been disappointed in some instances where the expatriates sent out to their countries have been anything but exemplary in their activities. This may very well be true of some of the staff working even in Sri Lanka where such persons have over-stepped their own Terms of Reference and got themselves involved in the internal affairs of the countries in which they are stationed. We have read lots of news items on the immorality and dishonesty of expatriate staff which has eventually caused untold of miseries to the families involved but where the expatriate is "conveniently transferred " to another country on another assignment! The mere change of an environment and country, does not necessarily change the attitudes of an individual- or does it?

Sri Lanka has been facing her own crisis situations during the near 30 years of war with LTTE terrorism and their dream of establishing their "mythical homeland" in the North and East which they have publicized widely in the international arena as their rightful claim. In their terrorist war against the democratically elected Governments of Sri Lanka, its citizens and the Tamil Community of Sri Lanka (of whom they profess to be the sole representatives). Due to the strategy used by these terrorists, they have managed the mesmerize the western minds with "sob stories of discrimination" and an ethnic war by the GOSL against the Tamil community of this country which is a total fabrication and a far cry from the truth. Nevertheless, believing these fabrications, most foreign governments and agencies have entered this country with the biased opinion that the GOSL and all citizens other than Tamils are guilty of the crime that has been publicized in the west by these LTTE terrorists! Even organizations like the UN have been overtly or covertly been acting with partiality towards the murderous terrorists and been pointing fingers at the GOSL and southerners who according to them are "extremists" or "nationalists" or still better "Sinhala chauvinists"!

Is the UN in this instance, in a position to state categorically that they(either their staff or organization as a whole) have not in any way been supporting LTTE terrorism? How many TRO outfits have they been helping either directly or indirectly? How many of their staff have been having personal rendezvous with
LTTE terrorists, the TRO or their sympathizers, and conniving to help them by using their official capacities or their official vehicles to help them out on specific assignments? Can we Sri Lankans expect an honest response? Why is it that such expatriates can get away with these activities while locals working for such organizations like the UN are expected to follow a separate set of rules?

Sri Lankans who have been born, educated and bred in this country naturally have a strong sense of loyalty towards their motherland. They can also see where the injustices lie. In their personal capacities as per the so called Human Rights Covenants, they have a right as a human being to speak out for what they feel is just and correct. It does not matter where such persons are employed. It would ofcourse, be highly irregular if such a local employee were to use his official capacity either of the UN (or any other organization) and make comments or give interviews expressing personal views. On the other hand, how many UN officials have been expressing their personal opinions when questions are posed to them? Is it deemed that they are expressing the view point of the UN?

When the USA dropped Napalm Bombs in Vietnam, when they invaded Iraq on a totally lame excuse of Iraq possessing chemical weapons (of which none were found), when they are threatening sanctions against Iran, North Korea etc., do we take the non-committal attitude of the UN to mean that they promote terrorism whether initiated by the USA or any other country or group?

Mohan Samaranayake is a highly respected journalist who has been writing widely on a wide range of topics which affect Sri Lanka and they have all been received well in this country. Irrespective of political parties involved, Mohan has been outspoken when injustice has been glaring in the eyes-can this be considered as a crime? As a Sri Lankan who feels impartially towards all citizens of this country including the Tamil community at large(not LTTE terrorists), he has always stated a balanced view point on local issues. He can also see quite clearly unlike the expatriate INGOs or NGOs who want the war to continue, that terrorism in this country has become fertile soil for these organizations to earn out of our misery. His crime is that he has dared to question the justice behind two separate examples and quite rightly as western think-tanks always promote- he is questioning everything! This is certainly not a crime but an asset to the country as well as the UN as an organization. His questioning seems to have made some people uncomfortable and it is this discomfort that is making them hound him. In this case what is "Freedom of Expression", " what is Human Rights" and " what is Personal Privacy and Individuality" or "Personal Independence" - all terms which western countries love to throw on us Asians or developing countries?

Contrary to what most people wish to think, organizations like the UN are hell bent on brainwashing their staff to think and act the way their so called "Mission Statements" are made- with absolute hypocrisy! What is good for the goose in this case, is not good for the gander it seems. It is no secret that within the UN, local staff who have a mind of their own are not too welcome unless they become "globalized" and turn themselves into mechanical morons who blurt only the officially accepted viewpoint. Ms. Orla Clinton of the UN who is a foreigner with only a very short stay in Sri Lanka to her credit until now, will not be able to understand the misery that promoters of terrorism have brought on this country for nearly three decades and the fact that people like Mohan Samaranayake who expresses balanced views are capable of thinking clearly and independently unlike the brainwashed " whiter than white" locals that one could find inside her organization. These individuals have forgotten even their own roots and identities for them to survive in employment.

Let us hope that the UN proves to all Sri Lankans, that they are a truly magnanimous and impartial body willing to support and help individuals maintain their individuality while performing excellent service to their employers. Once a person leaves office at the end of the day, he sheds his official status and is only an ordinary citizen of this country with a feel for one's country and people. Can anyone in his right mind consider this as a crime? Unless Ms. Clinton herself has an special soft spot for the LTTE terrorists, why would she want to hound Mohan Samaranayake or could it be, that either the TRO or LTTE have requested her to make sure that Mohan Samaranayake is thrown out of the UN? Let us see which of it is correct.

For Ms. Clinton, she is here on a short assignment in a foreign country hopefully wishing to stay on longer for the perks that this job offers. For Mohan Samaranayake, this is the country which nurtured him-naturally it is his freedom to speak for his country, in his own country!