By
a Special Correspondent
What cannot be concealed despite all the bravado is Sri Lanka’s concern over the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) sessions this month, slated to critique the island’s human rights record and inclined to propose the setting up of an international mechanism to probe the island’s rights abuses committed during the final phase of the war.
Sri Lanka is feeling the pinch and despite the massive international advocacy efforts undertaken by the State, the island appears extremely concerned about the possible outcome of the US-sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka, which appears to gather momentum.
Clearly, Sri Lanka does not enjoy being isolated or pushed against the wall. The island’s Head of State, President Mahinda Rajapaksa, is less than happy about the international human rights discourse and more so, about the treatment meted out to Sri Lanka.
The fear that the UN Rights Chief, Navanethem Pillay’s call for an international probe into the island’s alleged war crimes might find significant support among several countries, including powerful nations and former friends, appeared to cause some worry. Some of the fears and even irritations were candidly shared when President Mahinda Rajapaksa met a select group of Colombo-based foreign correspondents at Temple Trees on Friday (28).
Being a punching bag
Rajapaksa’s angst on being pushed against the wall and his inability to flex muscles as the leader of a small nation was manifest when he accused Washington of treating Colombo like, ‘Cassius Clay (Mohammad Ali) using a little boy as a punching bag,’ a reaction that he had been careful not to voice for a long time, despite the US’ persistence on an improved rights record and the constant call for accountability by the State. It is also the third time that the US is moving a resolution on Sri Lanka.
In a rare moment, Rajapaksa chose to share some of his concerns as a Head of State amidst increasing world pressure to demonstrate accountability to the war dead and those affected, openly admitting to his own discomfort of being censured by the UNHRC this month and comparing Washington’s treatment of Colombo being similar to Cassius Clay’s ‘punching bag.’
“We are uncomfortable with the whole resolution. There should be no resolution at all,” he insisted, accusing the US of moving a third resolution without any basis in an attempt to bully the small island State. Not mincing words on this one, he said with emphasis, that the ritualistic resolution was both ‘excessive and forced’ and also referred to it as a ‘true nuisance.’
Hidden US agenda
When posed the query as to whether he detected any hidden agenda by the US in pushing the resolution this March, and whether it was designed to support a regime change altogether, President Rajapaksa sounded unconcerned about any such agenda, confidently adding: “There may even be such a hidden agenda. But I am not worried, as long as I have the support of my people, which I do.”
As for the possibility of international sanctions against Sri Lanka, a matter that had come up in high level discussions with several countries openly advocating such a course of action, President Rajapaksa explained that the UNHRC lacked the mandate to impose sanctions though individual countries were free to do so.
“Only the Security Council can order international sanctions. But then again, there are countries with the veto power such as Russia and China,” he said, giving inkling as to how much he relies on some new found friends such as China, in the face of extreme international adversity.
Though critiquing the stance of the US, President Rajapaksa appeared careful as to not take pot shots at the UN Chief, who had been critiqued and condemned by his government members and loyalists. In addition to labelling Pillay as a well-wisher of the Eelamist cause, President Rajapaksa insisted on having done his ‘maximum’ to ensure reconciliation in the island, post war.
Excessive and forced action
Rajapaksa was flanked by his External Affairs Minister, Prof. G.L. Peiris at the meeting, who echoed the President’s sentiments, saying: “We feel acutely uncomfortable by the extreme pressure brought on us by a powerful country.”
The absence of an exact draft resolution and the possibility of several countries contributing to the dilution of the text as before did not appear to quell Rajapaksa’s concerns. His government launched a blistering attack on the UN recommendations for achieving reconciliation in the island in a report released last week. The document was condemned roundly as one that reflected ‘strong bias and is tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign State.’
Rajapaksa, a onetime human rights defender who repeatedly took up the issues of killings and disappearances in the South during the 1988-1990 JVP insurgency before the UNHRC his government now loves to hate, told the journalists that he remained committed to human rights and there was no change in his stance in this regard.
When asked to comment on his expectations of neighbouring India at the forthcoming UNHRC sessions in Geneva, also his partner country in the execution of the war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) during 2008-2009, Rajapaksa was careful not to critique the many moods of Delhi and Chennai, offering his understanding to ‘India’s political compulsions and electoral needs during election time.
When prodded as to how India may seek to vote on the US-sponsored third resolution on Sri Lanka, he said: “I don’t know. But we are aware that the Indians are going to face an election, just a month after the March session. The Indian political leaders have to consider their own future and take into account the mood of the electorate. We understand them. Politicians understand each other.”
India’s political compulsions
Appearing quite unconcerned about India’s stance, now that the giant neighbour has already voted in favour of a US-sponsored resolution in 2012 despite its tradition of not supporting country-specific resolutions, Rajapaksa told reporters that the dialogue between the two countries was far from over, as with all members of the UNHRC.
By way of further explanation, Rajapaksa told reporters that he is scheduled to meet and hold discussions with Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, at the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) summit in Myanmar, adding that External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris had already exchanged views with his Indian counterpart Salman Khurshid, a few days ago.
The President also had some thoughts to share on the recently released election manifesto of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) that called for the conducting of a referendum on the formation of a separate, independent Eelam among Lankan Tamil residents in Sri Lanka and abroad.
The AIADMK’s manifesto appeared to make the unflappable Rajapaksa react strongly. “How could the Tamil Diaspora participate in such an exercise? They are not citizens of Sri Lanka, but citizens of various other countries. They can only take part in referenda in those countries,” he said, stopping only short of calling the proposed exercise insane and impractical.
But such calls, Rajapaksa insisted, were indeed detrimental to achieving reconciliation in the island and added demands of this nature made by political leaders such as Jayaram Jayalalithaa, only could hinder the process of ethnic reconciliation.
However, President Rajapaksa appeared less lenient on the issue of fishermen, a topic that remains contentious and emotional for both India and Sri Lanka, insisting that some things simply cannot be done. He said: “India does not allow our fishermen to fish in its waters, so there!”
Despite the criticisms levelled against his administration, which many countries have described as being extremely authoritarian and insincere in the pursuit of genuine reconciliation, an undaunted Rajapaksa responded by saying: “We have done our best. We have resettled the displaced people, given them electricity, roads and schools. We have demined 94% of the war zone. The accusations against us are unfair. Every effort had been made to achieve what we set out to achieve.”
He also did not forget to refer to the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report, which is now treated as the basis for moving towards reconciliation. The President noted that Cabinet approval was granted for the LLRC report only in July 2012 and that the government only had 19 months to address some 280 recommendations, all geared towards one final goal desired by the country – reconciliation. He explained to the journalists that certain issues such as lands and languages are likely to take more time and added it was only natural.
Not playing doggy ball with the questions directed his way, President Rajapaksa sounded confident, despite a popular belief that his government’s popularity is on the wane. Answering queries on a snap presidential poll, Rajapaksa said there was no necessity to hold a presidential poll ahead of schedule. Quashing political rumours, Rajapaksa said that his Cabinet has been already informed that the next presidential election will be held in 2016, when his six-year term ends, and not a day before.
COURTESY:CEYLON TODAY