|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
Of Patriots, Heroics, Subversions of a nationBy Dimuth Gunawardena"When information flows freely, people are equipped with
tools to take control of their lives"……Ban Ki
Moon - 2nd May 2008 (Press Freedom day) My attention was caught by the comment made to the press by the US
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for "Democracy", "Human
Rights", and Labour Erica Barks-Ruggles at the conclusion of her
recent visit to Sri Lanka. Quote….
Behind the slogans like "human rights" "media freedom" "peace" there exists a bigger industry that thrives using the very terminology that marks their existence and permits them to operate with impunity in the "south" nations (those bullied into submission). It takes little effort to highlight "grave abuses committed by Governments" internationally and nations that are financially weak to counter the hyped up allegations and INGOs/NGOs ("not Government") elevated to "super heroes to civil society" by western media to launch their role of "transformations" based on the "agendas that their financiers aim to achieve" in various "geographical land masses of the world". The best example was the anti-Sri Lankan lobby to which INGO'S/NGO's located in Sri Lanka joined in a bid to nullify Sri Lanka's re-election to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). Celebrate they did when the news of Sri Lanka's omission was received. A party hosted by Mr Guy Rhodh of Soldar on 23rd May at his Colombo residence included Mr Phillip Atkins from Norwegian People's Aid, staff of ASB, Mr Mathew Todd of Swiss Labour Assistance (SLA)….(with a more interesting list of guests) The hearty toast was to congratulate all those who worked to ensure Sri Lanka was denied a seat on the UNHRC Council. These must be those "true patriots" that Erica Barks-Ruggles must have referred to! We wonder who are the masters of INGOs/NGOS like Prayathna, National Peace Council, Sarvodaya and the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) who stand accused by the public of "singing for their supper" to justify acts of terrorism. But, their predicament has to be empathized - if they fail to "sing" someone else is likely to take their place. There is a steady line of "parasites" to take up the mantle and there is no room for any outside infiltration. Funds come by organisations such as USAID through Academy of Education Development (AED) and other such fronts disbursing millions of Rupees - on the premise that their desires are fulfilled. Presently, one observes a massive recruitment drive by NGOs island wide. Their aim obviously is to establish a significant number of offices backed by their people to drive any "ideological" program when required. This does immediately raise the issue of internal security of the nation. Sri Lanka is not the only victim of INGO/NGO hidden agendas. The case of Kosovo (former Yugoslavia) and its separation illustrates INGO/NGO activity through Norway, USA and NATO states. Its deeper significance for Sri Lanka vis a vis the R2P agenda under the auspices of the World Federalist Movement, the Canadian Government (US satellite state) and even the UN should be an eye-opener The R2P agenda initiated and funded by Canada and Human Rights INGOs/NGOs is being pushed presently into reality with the UN starting off open sessions at its headquarters from 12 May 2008 on strategies to make R2P from concept to reality within the UN system. Sri Lanka's experience with foreign intervention goes back to colonial times followed by the entry of the Indian Peace Keeping Force that left many a Tamil woman raped, pregnant and their parents in shock (refer Rajini Thiranagama of UTHR). An army that was to maintain peace eventually had to be asked to leave before creating a replica of Vietnam by the US army. The R2P military intervention was exactly what the IPKF sought to do in Sri Lanka - as a foreign force they operated with a certain degree of impunity much like the piled up cases of rape, pornography, smuggling, arming terrorists etc being piled against UN peace keepers in all of the 18 missions globally. Evidently, the "Geopolitical" importance becomes a catalyst to the "interests" of Western powers (the unseen hands) on behalf of whom the INGOs/NGOs as agents ensure their "agendas" are fulfilled. Yugoslavia - the truth The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) operated under the auspices of NATO - its Chairman was Knut Volleback, Norway's Foreign Affairs Minister. Yugoslavia was asked to accept OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission in 1998 to monitor a "ceasefire" between the Yugoslav army and the KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army-an Albanian terrorist group) or face being bombed. The OSCE comprised of mostly Americans and it was easy to accuse the Yugoslav army of killing civilians in Racak - allegations to be proved false since the massacres were done by KLA on instructions of the CIA. It was however, enough reason for NATO troops to bomb Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999 using the Racak massacre as an excuse. One can imagine how other such events for intervention can be staged and INGOs/NGOs are easy tools to set the foundations. Volleback and Madeleine Albright (former US Secretary of State) worked
closely and her heartlessness is supported by her reply that the deaths
of 50,000 Iraqi children (as a result of US sanctions) were "worth
it". 1) Unify and prepare the KLA terrorists as an adversary to the Yugoslav army who would function on the ground while NATO takes on the air attacks (since the KLA was controlling 40% of Kosovo). 2) Engineer the Racak massacre as an excuse for the presence of NATO in Yugoslavia and was it a surprise when Toronto Star in its news report titled their story as " The hoax that started a War".. Even Shakespeare could not have written a better play! The case of Kosovo showcases how countries like Norway (certainly not the impartial peace facilitator) being a NATO member operates hand in glove with the services of INGO's/NGO's. The problems of Kosovo which is part of Serbia should have been solved internally. No country, or force has a right to impose a settlement or sponsor a terrorist movement in that country - no state has a right to coerce authorities to sign an agreement by threatening to bomb to the ground…. There are many other irregularities that occurred and too many to mention individually but what Volleback did echoes similar sinister designs that took place during Eric Solheims role in Sri Lanka - another Norwegian too. Norway's role in international peace takes us through its "peace roles' in Palestine/Israel, Serbia/Kosovo and Sri Lanka and we can clearly see how their diplomats operate with collaborations of the US State Department. To ask the Norwegians themselves, who all but confessed the whole game in a recent Christian Science Monitor article [1], Quote……… Anatomy of an evil empire
"We have about 50% of the world's wealth (not anymore) but only 6.3% of its population. ... In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity ... …..The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better." Thus, idealistic slogans are preferred option to market "sinister
designs" through the press to the world. Pentagon's "Joint Vision 2020" defines "the defeat
of any adversary or control of any situation across the full range of
military operations." The United States seeks to maintain and
expand its power over as much of the world as possible. As the Bush
administration's "National Security Strategy of the United States"
(NSS), published in September 2002, put it: Essentially America's "freedom and democracy" must be defended
and to fight terrorism of course though the document was not inspired
by the events that occurred on 9/11. This document was a precursor to
a document titled "Rebuilding America's Defences" (RAD) published
in September 2003 by the Project for a New American Century, a conservative
think tank whose members include Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz and many
others of the Bush administration. It is the blueprint for the Bush
administration's defense policy - one of the ideas has been implemented
in Iraq. In short, the United States intends to bully and dominate the world by force and maintain its status-quo at all costs to the rest of humanity. Mechanisms of Controlling the Empire The term "Client States" traversed through the Roman Empire, Nazi Germany, World War 2 and Russian empire. The US has not only "client states" but also "satellite states, puppet government and vassal states. These "clients" are quintessentially controlled by a foreign state (in Sri Lanka's case it could be a country like India with whom USA now has very close strategic partnership) and made to become dependent on it for economic or military or political support for pure survival. There are many ways to "control" - military intervention or R2P becomes a perfect option when the UN Security Council is unable to make a decision. Afghanistan, Iraq are perfect examples. Proxy Forces are those that appear as "Civil Society Groups" and INGOs/NGOs with their negative reporting, demonstrations and the arming of terrorist groups as was in the case of KLA and Pol Pot. Enforcer States - are those nations like India that agree to carry out any agendas if it meets their own strategic interest. Cour d'etats - or acts of sabotage such as the "Rendon Group". Foreign Aid - an effective tool for intimidation. Sanctions - an effective tool to make nations succumb to the will of the super powers. Here too we can see how EU is using the GSP+ as a threat to Sri Lana. Subverting elections - another means to destabilise using the media. CIA - RAW ....are we too ambitious to toy with the idea that recent missions of subversion, abduction, media assault....leading to civil unrest may have been the result of these intelligence services? Examples of "Freedom of the press" "Purchased Media" is a perfect tool for the INGO's/NGO's and easily helps to promote their overall game plan.. Hence Erica Barks-Ruggles statements and constant statements by the American Ambassador and State Dept. must be viewed through this prism. For example how ""Free Media"" plays on our thought process..... By the time the US invaded Iraq the "Free Media" had played their symphony so well that 42% of Americans believed that Iraq did 9-11 and the majority believed that Iraq's were supporting Al-Qaeda. Most Americans were fooled by the media into thinking Iraq was a direct threat to them, even though its military wasn't even capable of reaching the USA. The United States is actually one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the world. Its goal is not to stop terrorism; "terrorism" is only a pretext to justify American aggression worldwide. Today certain segments of Sri Lankan media too are playing this role in cohort with INGOs/NGOs who have systematically tarnished Sri Lanka's image through their heads appearing across BBC, AP, ABC, Reuters etc giving an ""Independent" political analysts" but end up depicting a nation in flames and a country in anarchy. Unauthenticated information is also used by other characters like John Holmes, Louis Arbour in their reporting to various world bodies. Of late the INGOs/NGOs prefer to use mere numbers - civilian deaths to portray genocide, carnage etc as an obvious means to steer R2P ratification through UN Security Council. US and their UN" - the guardian of human rights" Having created the background scenario the US backed Cambodia's Khmer Rouge into power in 1975 making the US directly responsible for the genocide that eventually took place by politically and financially helping the Pol Pot regime. The financing is said to be in the range of $85million. The Khmer Rouge was also backed in the UN through the US to enable the Pol Pot regime to return. However, the Khmer Rouge government ceased to exist in January 1979 following the invasion by the Vietnam army though Cambodia's UN seat was very much still Khmer Rouge. The genocide committed by Pot Pot was recorded in a 1979 UN Human Rights Commission report as being the "worst to have occurred anywhere in the world since Nazism". Yet, Pol Pot was never made to pay for his crimes - here lies the hypocrisy of US policy and the UN Human Rights Sub commission eventually had to drop its draft resolution on Cambodia in 1991. No more, the UN body decided, should member governments seek to "detect arrest, extradite or bring to trial those who have been responsible for crimes against humanity in Cambodia." No more are governments called upon to "prevent the return to government positions of those who were responsible for genocidal actions during the period 1975 to 1978." The western world such as EU countries supported USA on this resolution. This very same UN is pushing the R2P concept against its own member states like Sri Lanka. The use of proxy forces is further illustrated in the US setting up
of the Kampuchean Emergency Group (KEG) in the US embassy in Bangkok
to fight against Cambodia. KEG's mission was to "monitor"
distribution of Western humanitarian supplies sent to refuges camps
in Thailand and that Khmer Rouge camps were fed. $12million worth of
food were handed over to the Thai army by the World Food program in
1980 after US pressure - "20,000 to 40,000 Pol Pot guerrillas benefitted"
by this handover claimed former Assistant Secretary of State Richard
Holbrooke and not anybody else. The aid to Khmer Rouge destabilized
Cambodia for over a decade. This is the type of Humanitarian Aid these
INGO's/NGO's like the UN talk about for Sri Lanka. Can the UN that gave Pol Pot a seat, absolving them of "Crimes against Humanity" have any moral right to talk of R2P on any forum anywhere in the world together with rest of the INGO's and contract state "Canada"? Perhaps one can excuse the "young ladies" like Louis Arbours', or the Erica Barks-Ruggles who may not have been born during this time hence the hypocrisy in their work but we certainly were, and we remember, and we know the UN staff and their sinister plans better….. The US and the "US Client State"
The US was never worried or cared little for India's own ambitions but together they posed a threat to the "Chinese Pearls". While the US is aware of India's limitations especially India's inability to foster military supremacy and dominancy the US was also aware how India could be used to deploy a rapid-reaction force to be in countries along the rim of the Indian Ocean neighbours like Sri Lanka up to Madagascar or it's own Andaman Islands. However, sophisticated material like fast long-range aircrafts with aerial refuelling capabilities as well as other such arsenal was needed- the US could meet this need. India was after all one of the few countries that had the means to engage in a prolonged military exercise which even the EU did not have. Where the US cannot secure a "client state" it resorts to the support of separatist groups by financing and through diplomatic means using ethnic or religious or geographical differences. Prof James Petras article titled "Separatism and Empire Building in the 21st Century" published in the "Sri Lanka Guardian" QUOTE.... -any country in which the US cannot secure a stable client regime, it resorts to financing and promoting separatist organizations and leaders using ethnic, religious and regional pretexts.......... Washington only supports separatists in countries that refuse to submit to imperial domination and opposes separatists who resist the empire and its allies.......... and even extend it to the most rancid, reactionary, imperial sponsored 'separatist groups' with catastrophic results. Independent nations and their people, who oppose US-backed separatists, are bombed to oblivion and charged with 'war crimes'....... After 'independence', the separatist regime grants territorial concessions and building sites for US military bases. Investment privileges are granted to the imperial patron, severely compromising 'national' sovereignty...... When cross national irredentist movements challenge neighbouring states which are also targets of the US empire builders, they serve as launching pads for US low intensity military assaults and Special Forces terrorist activities................. Conclusion: ....UNQUOTE The global perspective with an American eye The US military does have limitations too. It certainly is not equipped to handle guerrilla resistance as evident in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq. The legacy of Vietnam and most recently their military effort in Iraq reveals excessive numbers of US casualties, increasing numbers of soldier suicides marking the highest in US military history. It then becomes a preferred option for the US to co-opt enforcer states like India to take actions on "their behalf": Thus the R2P type intervention presently being espoused is not as feasible as those who christened it imagined. There is always the danger of aggravating an internal blood bath when locals resort to opposing foreign forces entering one's nation. Hence the need to analyse the regional dynamics of the picture as they arise American defence If there is an agenda for Sri Lanka, how could the USA realize its objective using satellite client states like India without committing US troops? A superpower like the US desires to maintain its hegemony over potential adversaries. With the end of the Cold War Pentagon shut down almost 35% of its bases near these areas and shifted troops to small bases along the "arc of instability" - West and Central Asia. For minimal permanent facilities and limited permanent detachments the US would need Indian support - to link Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and Okinawa and Guam in the Pacific using India's strategic location. One then immediately realizes how better suited Sri Lanka is in view of its natural harbour in Trincomalee (now in Indian hands) Japan, South Korea, Singapore and Saudi Arabia are a few of Asia's alternatives for the US. Additionally, the Indian navy has been trained to fuel US ships and its port facilities have been provided to US forces engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. It has made sense to use Indian facilities for US training in view of its geographical landscape, ice-clad mountains, deserts etc. - Indian armed forces too have been used as peace keepers, humanitarian assistance providers, disaster relief operators etc. India has even agreed to allow US troops to use bases in Sri Lanka. This meant the LTTE was to be pressurized by Washington to resume talks with the Sri Lankan Government which led to the now failed CFA. For mutual gains Sri Lanka becomes a scapegoat to both India and USA! The new framework for US-Indo Defense Relationship started in June 2005. It mentions how the two would conduct joint combined exercises and exchanges to counter disaster situations and collaborate in multinational operations and "peace keeping". The agreement does not mention the UN at all - and was evident of US plans to use disasters and regional conflicts to introduce its troops and those of its allies in situations to which they earlier had no access. The July 18, 2005 joint statement between Bush and Manmohan Singh speaks of a new "US-India Disaster Relief Initiative that builds on the experience of the Tsunami core group" - this was how the US were able to introduce its troops and equipment into Indonesia's Aceh province and Sri Lanka, where 1500 marines and amphibious assault ships came in for " so called humanitarian purposes" and of late we recall the US naval ships that were quick to be placed round Myanmar following it's cyclone. Blatant violation of international law An aspect that Sri Lanka must seriously take note of is that the agreement between India and the US which mentions collaboration for "proliferation of weapons of mass destruction" -India being part of the US led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) - this is neither a treaty or an organization, but an informal coordination among a group of states, without binding into any terms or regulations, under the banner of preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). It discards the role of the UN and in essence calls upon participating states to arrest ("interdict") the transport of WMDs, delivery systems and related materials to or from states or others who may be proliferating them. "Delivery systems" may mean missiles and "related materials" is however vague and is likely to cover materials for manufacture of fertilizers which could be seized. During the Iraqi sanctions one would recall how it was used to prevent Iraq from importing graphite which was to be used in the manufacture of pencils under the excuse such graphite which may be used in the manufacture of weapons. According to the agreement PSI participants can board and search any vessel in their waters or even in high seas and seize such cargoes - even aircrafts "reasonably suspected of carrying such cargoes" and what of their fate if the aircraft refused to land? - They would be shot down alleging to have cargoes of WMDs! This was exactly what occurred to Iraq and a farcical allegation of WMDs to justify the invasion of Iraq as Racak was used to invade Yugoslavia. If and when the West were to intimidate and threaten the Sri Lankan
government with a Naval Blockade under UN auspices with an American
initiative it would always be with the blessing of New Delhi. The Indian public is totally oblivious to the course its country is taking and slowly being turned into a linchpin for the US and its sponsored military initiative for Asia. In 2003 US and Indian officials discussed a possibility of an "Asian NATO" alliance. NATO in Western Europe was originally fashioned to work against the Soviet Union and the "Asian NATO" alliance that US has in mind would be against both Russia (India's former traditional ally) and China. In his speech at the "Confederation of Indian Industry-World Economic Forum" conference in New Delhi, India's then foreign secretary Shyam Saran made a fairly explicit statement of the plans for an "Asian NATO." With Indian Navy on a "Look East" program sending goodwill missions to Southeast Asia to Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Japan to build links with countries around China, their navy has familiarised themselves in the South China Seas as a potential theatre of war and developed naval blue water capabilities to operate in this possible theatre of conflict under their alliance with USA. India new naval bases and listening posts like Myanmar (both India and China), Mozambique, Madagascar, Mongolia and Air Force bases in Kazakhstan are the Indian reply to the Chinese pearls. It's launching pad in Andaman Island..etc. In 2004 Japan made an offer for a "global partnership" with India to balance China's rising power in the region. The following year Indian and Japanese prime ministers met and reaffirmed the "global partnership" status - it was a partnership against proliferation of so called "Weapons of Mass Destruction" (WMD). It was all part of the grand alliance to meet the threat from China. The US efforts on China is likely to be long term which explains why Pentagon thinkers envision a new Cold War - Robert Kaplan in "How we would fight China" (Atlantic, June 2005) Yet China's position cannot be undermined. The emergence of a new silk road is obviously shows how the world is identifying China and not the US as future growth markets for oil exports. India, South Korea and Malaysia are likely to be included in this list. 2025 forecasts reveal how China will import three times as much oil from the Gulf as the USA. The new Silk Road will certainly outshine the old Silk Road and its connections to Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Iraq.
The proposed security system will deal with three international security threats for the USA - over ambitious China, containment of recently wealthy (from surging commodity prices) Russia and the spread of Taliban led Islamic extremism in Central Asia. Indian involvement would make it look indigenous and not cause political hiccups and US troops would not have to be deployed. The regional implications For the proposed security system to succeed requires India to emerge as a counterpoise to China which would of course follow with US backing to secure India's membership to the UN Security Council. However, with the US military being stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and signs of strain revealed through US economy one wonders how the US plans to make India into a "global power"? Would India jeopardise the US37billion trade between China and itself for this ambition? It then makes sense for US to resort to fall back on imperialist tendencies and this explains the invasion of Iraq and how the hold on oil may solve a part of the US problems. Russia is also under US and Indian surveillance - US (assisted by EU) sponsored "revolutions" in Georgia and Ukraine, supported separatists in Chechnya to create a network of US allies around Russia. The US is also pushing for a "security organization" in the region of the oil-rich Caspian Sea excluding Russia and China. The US National Security Strategy (September 2002) declared that the United States would not tolerate the emergence of a competitor, not only for global hegemony or even for regional hegemony in any part of the world. Indian Manoeuvrings India has taken great efforts to politically and economically keep a firm footing strategically in Sri Lanka's Northern and Eastern Provinces - [The NIOC tank farm and jetty, proposed IT park in Trincomaleee, Kanthale Sugar Mill, KKS Cement Plant, Muttur and Nilaweli, Pulmudai, Valachchnai area for power projects, mining of Thorium, Titanium, (Illmanite and Zircon) and the Mananar Basin Block] in response to Hambanthota port being developed by the Chinese. This occasions us to quote TULF leader Sambanthan's statement that India is not concerned about the Tamil people - only itself (India has got Trincomalee and the Tamil people have got nothing) But then what about the Sethusamuram project for the North yet in all likelihood it is bound to submerge Jaffna province eventually. With India being identified as a "client state" of the West and signing military alliances, India is being bound to the world's most reactionary power and becomes a target of the anti-US forces thus exacerbating the terrorist element India presently faces internally. It then begs India to rethink its strategic alliance with US and ask of itself whether India really needs US support to dominate the region. India is a power in itself in the Indian Ocean, as a member of SAARC it has ageless ties with its neighbours, there is the Non-Aligned Movement or G77 and let us also note the ties with Iran, Venezuela, Russia and of course China etc. would India really wish to severe ties with its neighbours and be considered a hostile nation to the region? India and Iran are to sign a massive gas pipeline through the two nations. Accepting that India wants greater supremacy it would benefit India to develop closer ties with its neighbours instead of acting as a hostile nation - as suggested by Sri Lanka's Foreign Minister to work on joint exercises like naval patrols between Indian and Sri Lankan Navy to curb proxy networks in the region. India's conflicting and ambiguous actions makes anyone doubt their real intentions. Just like the sudden arrival of the three stars to Sri Lanka during the third week of June 2008. Obviously, Indian politics vis-a-vis Sri Lanka has been jolted into action by internal forces - namely Tamil Nadu. Internal politics being converged and confused with international bilateral relations will send not only mixed messages but result in catastrophic repercussions as was seen by the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Appeasing terrorists has its limitations and certainly it is not something that can continue forever. India must realise in the face of terrorist threats themselves that the LTTE is a non-negotiable factor and the sooner it is eliminated as a force the better even for internal politics of India where the Tamil Nadu politicos will not be able to politically manipulate the Central Government and will have to look for another avenue to hold the Central Government's attention. All this while the Central Government of India has been held to "ransom" by the Tamil Nadu politicos like Vaiko and Karunanadhi more so due to the "United Progressive Alliance" (UPA) having to currently do a fine balancing act between the so called "Nuclear Deal" with USA and it's Left Parties, thus affecting any sound policy for India and Sri Lanka as well as the region. Looking at India's neighbourhood like the Maoist govt. in Nepal, Military junta in Myanmar, Pakistan...etc Sri Lanka affords the best opportunity for India to forge a genuine strategic partnership that addresses each other's interests and concerns.
For Sri Lanka's part it may be prudent to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as observers joining in a string of nations such as Pakistan, Nepal and Iran where SCO is presently functioning as an alternate to the Asian-NATO as being envisaged by US and possibly India's alliance to it. Even though India too has observer status in SCO. In view if the current Republican lobby and the presidential candidate McCain call to set up a "League of Democracies" omitting China and Russia to justify international legitimacy for American foreign invasions like Iran, Myanmar...recognition of Kosovo...etc considerations which hold grave ramifications for Sri Lanka's future and it's strategic options comes into dramatic effect. The possible victory of Barak Obama as the next US president in view of his pro-Israeli speech at the "American Israel Public Affairs Committee" (AIPC) indicates his capacity to change tune due to political pressures just like the. role played by the former ambassador to Sri Lanka and member of Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Teresita C. Schaffer in the Democratic campaign after the election and the reality of the full impact lobbing by other Democratic forces in the House of Congress such as Congressmen Brad Sherman, Frank Pallone, Rush Holt…etc. Considering these developing scenarios and our voting against Sri Lanka by this western block Sri Lanka too needs to seriously consider the strategic direction of its policy. Countries like Cuba are a fine example to those that formulate such policy. Conclusion back at home "Borders are scratched across the hearts of
men, By strangers with a calm, judicial pen,
Sri Lanka independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity is facing dangers primarily from the UN looking at the actions of UN staff like Ms. Radhika Coomarasamy (as proved by ICES case) and all other UN R2P agendas, in close connivance with the INGO's/NGO's illustrated by acts such as Ms. Bavani Fonseka of CPA who shouts about how Sri Lankans kill children in New York when the UN Security Council is in session with one eye at R2P or when Mr Jehan Perera who clears the name of the LTTE by saying they kill only because the army kills them or Ms. Nimalka Fernando beats at herself in the chest and shouts and screams at various circuses and roundabouts who knows not what she shouts about anyway, it all for the whims of the hidden hand of their paymaster operating silently with a far bigger picture unseen and..... . If one were to carefully analyse the statements and actions of the UN by its staff under leadership of our very own Ms. Rahdhika Coomarasamy, Sri John Holmes, and Ms. Louis Arbour..etc. The acts of systematic sabotage by them of a member state like Sri Lanka is too numerous to mention. When the international newswires pickup some gossip from a fancy cafe in Colombo or quote an "Independent Political Analyst" like Mr Jehan Perera or Mr Sunanda Deshapriya destroying the good name of the country in the eyes of the world we must be aware as to whom they work for, the unseen hand Therefore to all we should say Before vilifying the Country, the Government and its people's it would be prudent to have these INGO's/NGO's publicly present their audited statements and allow the Sri Lanka public to scrutinize their activities. They must address the ideological challenges thrown at them by the people of Sri Lanka and then pack up and leave a place where they are not welcome or needed (perhaps some country like Sieerra Leone might accept all but one). Similarly that there has emerged a magnitude of forces who are now ready to expose the hidden hands that work for petty gains and profit. To the people of the country if the need arises. Our politicians have a great responsibility by all the people of all nationalities of this country at this most crucial time in history not to play dirty and opportunistic politics while being on the pay roll of various foreign masters. The world was not interested that the country's East had been rid of the terrorists and provincial elections held a few months later, the world actually does not give two hoots about our cost of living, our human and political rights, the abductions or disappearances, they will only use these to achieve their own strategic objectives using us They for example a case of point being where they were more interested
in the visit of one of our leaders who suddenly appeared in Europe to
lobby for an extension of the GSP+ facility - yet there is information
to say that prior to his departure he had sent a letter to the Commissioner
for External Relations of the EU informing that his party has decided
to support the country claim subject to the condition that the Government
to amend the 1978 Constitution in order that the "International
Covenant on Civil Political Rights" (ICCPR) be incorporated into
the laws of Sri Lanka. Page: 3 If the GSP+ were to be removed, it would be interesting to note
if one of the reasons was that the ICCPR had not been fully incorporated
in the Constitution. This then immediately makes anyone wonder why this
political leader should write to the EU official saying the his party
is willing to support the Government in amending the constitution -
the EU official needs not be informed of internal matters especially
when the Supreme Court had ruled that "no domestic legislation
is necessary to give effect to the ICCPR" -it begs the question
what his real intentions. Who was really behind these moves we have
to reluctantly ask? Were any INGO's/NGO's lobbying influenced this politician
to put lives of thousands of poor peoples livelihoods at stake for their
selfish agendas? This same politician made some amazing statements in India about "Sri Lanka Loosing the war on terror" makes one wonder at whose prompting he did that? Who is manipulating whom? Whose elections these politicians are really interested in? While we must no doubt strengthen the judicial processes, and other mechanisms that guarantee our freedoms and our political rights, ensure the rights of all our citizens, strengthen the democratic institutions of our country, ensuring the freedom of our press, that does not mean we have to go crying to the "white man" as some of the politicians are doing now for us to do so, it is disgraceful and they in turn only seek to exploit our divisions for their advantage. Let us keep our fights in our own house, and tell those ambassadors to go back to where they came from or mind the business of the countries they represent without interfering in ours. Let us tell our neighbours to keep their intelligence networks in check in our land for if not and they continue to engage in political activities of subversion and exploitation, and then let it be said the costs could be great. Let all our people not become victims or pawns in somebody else's agenda of supporting separatism all over the world in countries that refuse to submit to their empires. Let us also stand steadfast in our resolve to oppose all separatist elements there are also very much part of the greater agenda of these empire builders. The world is seeing too much conflict and bitterness - we must all understand and stand up against all those who are fundamentally responsible for the troubles that prevail. There is a hidden hand of some INGOs/NGO's behind the current crisis that is facing the country being blown out of proportion both nationally and internationally to carry out their agendas. Therefore let us save our children from the machinations of the likes of all those who work in cohesion to undermine the integrity of nations through neo-colonial agendas for world dominance.
|
||||||||||||
|
|
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.
Copyright
© 1997-2004 www.lankaweb.Com
Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved. |
|||||||||||
