Sri Lanka Peace Chief rejects
Nordic Foreign Ministers' Statement
Prof Rajiva Wijesinha Secretary
General Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process
07th January 2007
The Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process regrets very much
the recent statement of five Nordic Foreign Ministers regarding the
decision of the Sri Lankan government to terminate the Ceasefire Agreement
signed in 2002. Whilst we must assume it was delivered in good faith,
such a pronouncement that is replete with misconceptions can only contribute
to the polarization that some of those concerned with the Sri Lankan
situation are anxious to promote.
Problems with the Ceasefire Agreement were clearly described in 2002
by Lakshman Kadirgamar, the former Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka, whose
assassination by the LTTE was perhaps the most obvious indication of
the contumely with which the LTTE regarded the CFA.
Though we cannot expect all Foreign Ministers to be as learned and
logical as Mr Kadirgamar, the statement of the Nordic conglomeration
would have benefited from at least some awareness of the contents of
Mr Kadirgamar's analysis. We therefore urge at least the current advisers
to the relevant Ministers to study that document.
The Ministers, in their ahistorical pronouncement, claim that as many
as 10,000 lives may have been spared by the Agreement. Whilst the logic
of this claim is dubious, it also shows signs of ignorance of the rulings
of the originally fully Nordic Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission, as well
as the concerted attacks conducted by the LTTE while the CFA was supposed
to be in operation. Sadly, no Nordic conglomeration saw fit to make
any statement when, in August 2006, the LTTE engaged in flagrant violation
of the CFA through two massive military assaults that went far beyond
the 3000 odd individual cases of CFA violation that the SLMM had previously
recorded.
As conspicuous was the deafening silence from Valhalla when the LTTE
summarily rejected Nordic monitors from countries belonging to the European
Union. It even escaped the SLMM itself that this was a flagrant violation
of Article 3.5 of the CFA, though the SLMM subsequently made it clear
that it had to curtail its operations. The Nordic conglomeration that
now expresses concern about 'an important mechanism that protected civilians'
were scrupulously silent for a year and longer about the restrictions
on that mechanism that the LTTE had imposed and which they so pusillanimously
accepted.
Despite such violations, the Sri Lankan government strove to abide
by the Ceasefire for over five long years. When President Kumaratunga
resumed the reins of government in 2004, she continued in all good faith
to indulge the LTTE, with financial and other assistance.
After President Rajapakse took over, despite continuing attacks by
the LTTE, GOSL refrained from retaliatory action for several months,
until the threat became so intense that resistance was essential.
The continuing good faith of GOSL received no plaudits from Scandinavia.
Continuing acts of terror by the LTTE received no criticism. It was
only after repeated requests from the Peace Secretariat that the SLMM
finally noticed in its weekly reports the forced conscription that Norwegian
Ambassador Hans Brattskar described when he debriefed GOSL after his
last visit to Kilinochchi.
Nordic worries about possible increases in violence and human suffering
could well have been expressed earlier, and it is sad that they emerge
only in the context of criticism of the Government.
Finally, it is not only the Nordic countries that believe that only
a political solution can address the grievances of all ethnic groups
in the country to provide a sustainable peace. This is the belief of
the Government, and it would be well if those who sincerely believed
this amongst the international community provided support to those in
the Government who have made this a priority.
Though the battle against terrorism, as the international community
has recognized, cannot be relaxed, simultaneously the Government is
aware that it must move to a political solution to political problems,
and assistance for this would be welcome. Instead therefore of indulging
in polarizing pronouncements, we urge Nordic Ministers interested in
the welfare of all Sri Lankans to assist both in confidence building
measures amongst all ethnic groups in the country, and in promoting
a sustainable peace through discussions and democratic practices that
will ensure peaceful development for all.
|
