Sumanasiri Liyanage

Dr Pradeep Jeganathan’s dinner experience in Delhi with a French anthropologist reminded me a recent meeting I happened to have with a European high level diplomat in Sri Lanka. Referring to the recent events in Sri Lanka, he said: “I would be worried if similar things have happened in Balkans or even in India, but I am not worried at all for what is happening in Sri Lanka”. Is this a difference between an anthropologist who in Dr Jeganathan’s account was superficially worried about Sri Lanka and a diplomat who has been here for quite a long time but least worried about the Sri Lankan events? The diplomat in my story was rather angry as international community failed to tame the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL). Did my experience contradict Dr Jeganathan’s dinner experience? I would say no. Two stories, in my view, reveal how the imperialist mind works with regard to the countries in the global South; they worried if they could control the situation and they become angry when they fail to do so. I am fully agree with Dr Jeganathan when he emphasized the need of situating the notion of R2P (a kind of SMS language for Responsibility to Protect) in the global context in order to understand it fully and properly. This is something to be highlighted since many who talked about polyvocalty, diversity and heterogeneity appear to think IINTERNATIONAL as a homogeneous community. Since they cannot see such homogeneity in international community they identify it with the West.

In what context, R2P suddenly grew in importence in Sri Lanka? The GoSL has refused to extend resident visas of Dr Norbert Ropers and Dr Rama Mani for the year 2008. When visas are refused, explanations are not normally given. Although in case of Dr Ropers it was not clear why his visa was not extended, in case of Dr Mani, it appears that she was refused resident visa because of her involvement in R2P and GCR2P (Global Center for R2P). Dr Norbert Ropers is the Director of Colombo-based Berghof Foundation for Conflict Studies and Dr Rama Mani was the Director of International Center for Ethnic Studies (Colombo sector). It appears that the two decisions are taken separately, may be, for different reasons. In case of Berghof Foundation, the operation of organization was not questioned and it seems to be a decision only against its director, not against the organization. However, in the case of ICES, it is different. We heard that the state machinery including the CID had begun an investigation on the activities of the organization. Can this action be justified? What does these recent action by the government of Mahinda Rajapakse signify?

Those who are familiar with my writings know that I am a persistent critique not only of Colombo civil society but also of the concept of civil society. I think the idea that a vibrant civil society is imperative to a vibrant democracy is an inflated one. In other words, in this part of the world the presence of vibrant civil society does not ensure democratic governance for two reasons. First, civil society in this part of the word has always been a small and elitist segment so that its influence is not wide-spread or deep-rooted. Secondly, civil society has been subjected to the ‘colonization of power and money’. Hence I always argue that many civil society organizations do have corrupt, non-transparent and undemocratic practices and hierarchical institutional structures. However, this critique does not imply by any means that the presence of civil society organizations is not of any significance. They played an important role in many fields. In this sense, ICES has done a significant contribution to Sri Lankan democratic discourse.

Let me also say something on R2P. After Gareth Evans’s Neelan Thiruchelvam memorial lecture, I browsed through World Wide Web and read about it. This may be relevant to the issue at hand mainly because R2P and the state security happened to be linked in taking an action against Dr Rama Mani and the ICES. This seems ridiculous to me. The notion that the international community should be given right or responsibility to protect people who are subjected to multiple forms of suppression and oppression and whose livelihood is threatened of course consistent with fundamental normative values of humans. In my opinion, the notion of sovereignty should be subordinated to this basic normative value. The presence of such a responsibility may even be interpreted as something that engenders state security in the sense that states would be careful in dealing with its own population. Nonetheless, I propose that the concept of R2P has to be viewed critically. R2P is not an abstract concept; it is suggested to put into practice in the context that is characterized by the global dominance of power and capital. The recent statement of the German Minister of International Development that received so much publicity in Sri Lanka showed the arrogance of global powers and they continue to perceive global south as their backyard. So my criticism of R2P is contextual and what I emphasize is that R2P in practice may be another attempt by global political and economic powers to dominate the world.

In my opinion, there have been two forces at work that people in the global south should seriously take into account. First is the attempt of international capital with its institutions to constantly subjugate the countries that achieved formal political independence after the World War 2. Dr Jeganathan has lucidly and powerfully revealed how these forces operate worldwide developing new institutions bypassing the institutions of the United Nations. I may add that capitalist powers invariably try to use the United Nations and its institutions in order to achieve its own interests. However, we would make serious blunder if we stop at recognizing and understanding the operation of this force while neglecting the second force that is in operation at local level. This second force is the post-colonial state that tries to suppress and oppress constantly its own population. The explanation of non-extension of visa to Dr Ropers and Dr Mani should also include this dimension. I would argue the Sri Lankan state has inflated the issues of R2P and the activities of INGOs for its own strategic reasons. The government of Mahinda Rajapakse wants to silence all kinds of criticism in order to make the Sri Lankan state more authoritarian.

When we look at the issues taking into account these two forces at work, I believe that the attempt to see R2P as a conspiracy sounds satirical and totally out of proportion. So if government or its informants trying paint a picture that an invitation extended to Gareth Evans is part of a big conspiracy to threaten Sri Lanka’s security in the midst armed conflict are not only exaggerating but totally misled.

Secondly, the ICES has its own history. Its founder, late Dr. Neelan Thiruchelvam, contributed immensely to understanding the ethno-political conflict in Sri Lanka and the nature of Sri Lankan state. He was assassinated by the LTTE mainly because of his contribution to democratic discourse in Sri Lanka. ICES had followed the same tradition throughout its history and there is no sign of deviation from this long tradition. Has it suddenly become a fortress of conspirators? Was Dr Rama Mani made its director to carry out this conspiracy? Rather I prefer to conclude that the conspirators operate on the side of the state.

The Sri Lankan state is in dilemma. It is in a war with the LTTE. It seems that Mahinda Chinthanaya perceives that it is not possible to withstand any kind of criticism while it is waging war against the LTTE. In my opinion this is a mistaken view. The government spokesperson tried give legitimacy to its military engagement with the LTTE saying that it is aimed at liberating the people from LTTE’s authoritarian rule. However, war has pushed the government to deploy the same authoritarian practices. It supports directly and indirectly para military organizations. It is trying to centralize everything in the hands of the President by refusing to appoint the Constitutional Council so that all important appointments can be done by the President himself. The attacks of the government on civil society organization in Colombo are a part of the process towards authoritarianism. The opposition parties have once again showed its impotency in countering this process. We need a social movement similar to what existed in the pre- 1994 period to counter the forces of money and power (using the Mandel’s term to denote capital and the state).

The writer teaches political economy at the University of Peradeniya. E-mail: sumane_l@yahoo.com

I remembered John Denver’s passionate song dedicated to the refugees called “Fallen leaves”, as I sat in the Chennai airport, trying to make sense of what I had seen and heard and my own feelings, recalling my visit to Sri Lankans who had fled to India in fear of their lives and live in camps as refugees. One of the lines from the song that kept coming back to me was what I had put as the title to this reflection.

At the airport, I myself felt a bit of a refugee, having come to the airport from an overnight bus. It had not been an easy journey, traveling by a night train, and spending the day at the store house that now serves as a home to 26 families, and then taking an overnight bus back, straight to the airport. And several other train, bus and auto rides in between. But I guess the difficulties in my journey pales when compared to the journeys that the people I met had undertaken, on makeshift boats, often overcrowded. Mine had certainly been a journey by choice, taking advantage of attending a conference in Chennai, while they had not much choice in undertaking the journey, the choice of fleeing to India and remaining in Sri Lanka having being one of life or death.

Some had paid as much as Rs. 10,000 to get on boats that carried anything between 10-40 people, but ill equipped to carry so many. One mother told me that all her three young children had vomited and fainted in the journey. They had not only to brave the rough waves of the ocean, but also the firing from the Sri Lankan Navy. They also had to take care to avoid any cross fire between the Navy and the LTTE’s sea tigers. I remember the story of several people killed in the seas off Mannar last year. A priest who was with me, reminded me that that was only one incident that had been reported in the media, but that there have been many other such reports. The departure points are usually Pesalai and Thaleimanar on the Mannar island.

A few years before, people have made the same journey, for much pleasant purposes such as shopping, with only the sea to fear for, for about Rs. 2,000. It was still illegal, but it was accepted part of life, as normal as coming to Colombo from Mannar and going back. My mother and others have told me stories of how Sri Lankans all over the country used to go to India by boat, when there was a regular boat service in operation, decades ago.

Arriving in India
People fleeing to India by boat are met on arrival by Indian authorities, who question them, particularly regarding any links they may have had to the LTTE or other militant groups. They usually have to spend some days in a transit camp called “Mandapam”. The duration of stay there varies, with one man I spoke to saying he had to wait for 26 days, while I also met others who had stayed shorter times. Then, they are sent to more “permanent camps”. I also heard from some that Indian authorities give them a choice of which camps they can go to.

I was with two Catholic priests, anxious to visit their dispersed flock and two workers from a church based NGO working with refugees. We talked with several youth, women and men. The shrill voices of the kids and babies crying filled the air during our brief stay. There were many young babies, one as young as three months. I was told that 5 children have been born to this community, in the last one and half years they had been here.

I heard that the camp I visited was a one of the smaller ones, with 26 families at present, and there were 12 larger camps in Dharmapuri area itself, as well as many others throughout Tamil Nadu. According to an article published this week, there are over 97,000 Sri Lankan refugees living in 117 campuses and 60,000 outside the camps in Tamil Nadu. After particular incidents of violence, large numbers flee to India, with 16000 refugees having arrived in India in a six week period between Jan-Feb 2007 and 6000 in August 2006, according to the Indian Ministry of External Affairs.

I also heard from the aid workers I went that Indian authorities closely monitor who visits these camps, and in Chennai, Indian friends warned me that I would be followed. But unlike in places like Jaffna, where I was sure I was being followed around, I didn’t get any sense of being followed or intruded by any intelligence officers.

Running away from fear and insecurity
Many people I spoke to were from Pesalai, a place I had enjoyed some of the best seafood for many years, including last December. One woman described how they had run to seek refugee in the church, having heard that the Navy was after them, shooting houses, burning boats and shooting at fishermen. “We ran to the church because we thought we would be safe there, but they threw grenades there while we were inside. One women was killed and around 50 injured” she recounted. “If the Navy also attacks the church, we have no place to go with our children, that’s why we came here” another woman told us.

Another woman recounted the killing of a whole family in Vankalai, another village close to Pesalai. She mentioned that they have been scared after that incident, and after the attack on the Pesalai church, she had decided to leave, as she felt it’s not safe for her children.

Many in the camp had suffered greatly due to the war. The only son of one woman had been killed several years back. Another women’s husband had been shot in the arm and seriously wounded as he was returning home after fishing. He had survived, but the family had decided to flee the country, as the husband had been called by the Navy for questioning.

One man mentioned that he had to leave two sons behind, one had been recruited by the LTTE. Another woman said she had not seen recruitment by the LTTE, but that she had heard about it. “Who can we trust? We thought LTTE was fighting on our behalf, but we are not sure now” said another man.

Another women whose children had been sick in the boat journey, said that before coming here, every time she heard a blast, which is fairy regular, she would get scared and worry about the children. “Sometimes I run to the school to make sure they are ok” she said.

There were also some people from around Murunkan, who had come to India, to protect their children and families from imminent battles. “when the army and the LTTE start to attack each other, it is us innocent people who get caught in the middle, so we decided to run away till the fighting stops” one young man with a 3 year old baby told us.

Gone home in better times, but forced to flee again
Several people have been to India before as refugees. “My family was here for four years in the 1990s, it was so difficult to live hear, so we went back when we thought things were better. But as fighting started again, we had no choice but to come back, however much we will have to suffer hear” was how one person expressed his experience.

Amongst those who had fled from the Murunkan area was one man, who had fled to India for the 3rd time. “Twice, I went back when things were looking better, but both times I had to run away again. I don’t know whether I should ever go back again, as who can tell what will happen after sometime, even if there is peace?” I didn’t know what to say, so just responded with a vague statement about not losing hope, which I know wouldn’t have meant much.

Living as refugees
One fishermen told me that he had been earning as much as Rs, 2,000 – 3,000 per day in Sri Lanka, and now he is reduced to casual jobs, which are uncertain.

It appeared that most men somehow manage to do some work. It was not clear whether this is legally allowed by the Tamil Nadu state government, but it seemed as if it was at least tolerated. Indeed, if they were not allowed to work, these families would not survive. They were receiving rations of 12kg of rice and an allowance of around Rs. 1,000 (Sri Lankan rupees) for adults and Rs. 250 for a child, depending on the age. Vegetables, fish, meat etc. have to be purchased by the families. Children are also allowed to go to local schools and a NGO conducts additional evening classes. I also heard that arrangements have been made by these groups to facilitate some of the children to sit for Sri Lankan G.C.E. Ordinary and Advanced level exams. Being mainly Catholic, many also mentioned the support they receive from the Priest in a nearby church. When we were there, we met a religious sister who visits them regularly, as well as 12 other camps located in the Dharmapuru area.

Many had come with almost nothing, but they been provided some kitchen utensils by various non governmental and church groups. They had also been provided canvas sheets, and these are being used to demarcate a “room” for each family within the large hall.

Impatient to go back…but only when they sense peace and security
Almost everyone I spoke to said they yearn to go back. Some even said they are hoping they can go back this year. “Nothing like our own country, so we want to go back. But we will only go when there is no fighting and when our security is guaranteed” said one women, who spoke to me in fluent Sinahlese. She said she has been following the news closely on radio, and was quick to ask about my family when I mentioned I live near Mount-Lavinia, where several people were seriously injured in a bus bomb few days ago, while I was in India.

“We face a lot of difficulties here, but at least we can sleep in peace, without worrying about bombs” said other women, who was also keen to go back as soon as possible.

Hoping for a “peace beyond all fear”
We were warmly welcome to the humble dwelling, and the inmates laid out mats which they use for sleeping, to let us sit. The building was very warm, but the warmth of the people helped me to bear this. We were served cakes, fruits and tea on arrival. An old women, who spoke some Sinhalese, repeatedly asked me about lunch, and finally, we were served with a wonderful meal, Sri Lankan style. A religious sister working in the camp told me that they would have bought this rice from outside, as this seemed much better than what they get through the rations.

Before, I had always enjoyed the hospitality of people in and around Mannar, including Pesalai and Murunkan, where most of the people I met yesterday had come from. I had enjoyed their hospitality and warm friendship, even in their desperate situation as refugees.

As I remember the faces of these peoples and their stories, I remember the words in John Denver’s song “are they not some dear mother’s child…or are they just like falling leaves who give themselves away, from dust to dust, from seed to shear and to another day”

And thinking back, looking towards the future, I only hope as John Denver does when ending his song, for a “peace beyond all fear” in my country. And that I could one day enjoy the hospitality of these peoples again, in better circumstances, in their own homes.

The current socio-economic, political and ground situation in Jaffna from a resident in the embattled region in the North of Sri Lanka as captured by Vikalpa Video.

Also see Present situation in Jaffna: A video interview in English and Sinhala.

It’s easy. You just lead them a little less. It’s an old joke, born in the Vietnam War, and first recorded by Michael Herr, though Kubrick made it famous with his portrait of the crazed US Marine door gunner in Full Metal Jacket. In layspeak, a shooter “leads” a running figure so that he’s aiming at where the target will be when the bullet reaches it. Women and children run slower than an adult male.

It’s not so funny anymore though, when we’re fighting a war in which the uniformed enemy often is a woman or a child. Earlier this week, a US military court sentenced Sgt Evan Vela, a 24-year-old Army sniper, to ten years imprisonment for killing an Iraqi civilian. Funnily/sadly, the reason he was convicted was because he lied about planting a weapon on the dead man. The Iraqi and his teenaged son stumbled into a sniper ‘hide’, where Vela and his team were sleeping. The Americans took them prisoner, and later killed the father (it’s claimed he tried to warn some passing insurgent suspects of the American position) after releasing his son. They then planted a rifle on the body and claimed he was an insurgent. If they had killed the two Iraqis immediately, probably nothing would have happened, as it would have been passed off as a simple case of mistaken identity. Sad, but an inevitable part of a dirty war.

In Afghanistan, in 2005, a US Navy SEAL team’s hide was discovered by local goatherds. The team leader decided to let the goatherds go, but the latter then alerted nearby Taliban troops who attacked the team, killing several, including the team commander Lt Michael Murphy. A Chinook helicopter coming in to rescue the team was shot down, killing the eight SEALs and eight Army Special Forces soldiers on board. Back in 1991, the British SAS patrol, Bravo 20, was spotted by an Iraqi goatherd, who alerted the authorities. In the resulting search operation, some of the British soldiers were killed and others captured and tortured.

It all seems a bit unfair, doesn’t it? Kill or be killed; but not quite. Kill, and you might be a murderer, don’t, and you might die. Or not. The unfairness of it all is what struck me most when I first read about Evan Vela. Unfair on the sergeant himself, unfair on his Iraqi victim, and unfair on both families as well. I myself have never had to make that life-or-death decision, mostly because of geography. Elephant Pass was a fairly isolated base, and most civilians who had any sense had left the area, so anything we saw could be killed. When I first arrived in EPS in December 1990, the garrison was securing the base’s perimeters after the LTTE onslaught of the previous months that had started off the Second Eelam War. During this security operation, the base perimeter had been expanded to swallow several small hamlets that, upto the end of the ceasefire, had been populated. The civilians had obviously left in a hurry, leaving most of their stuff behind, and my platoon was detailed to clear the houses. We burned everything we couldn’t use, and watching all those saris and flowery frocks burning, I was also struck by how unfair it all was. Sometime in ‘91, I was spotting for a sniper, and he called in mortars on a Tiger column that was on a road. There were civilians on the road as well, and some of them were hit too. Afterwards, we watched through our scopes as a foreign doctor or medic (we could see his blonde hair even at six-hundred yards) tended to the fallen, including the Tigers. My partner then shot him. Unfair?

They say all’s fair in love and war, but it isn’t in either. We all know that. There are thousands of war stories, millions, and they’re all unfair if you look at them too closely, or from a different angle. So why I am I writing this? This isn’t about the Geneva Conventions or playing by the rules. We know that doesn’t always work. Maybe it’s about conscience, and doing the right thing. Military training, however, strives to first and foremost destroy the conscience and replace it with a value system different to that of the normal world. Following one’s conscience, too, has its dangers, as can be seen in the SEAL and SAS incidents, and in at least one situation, the man with the scruples paid with his life.

One thing the military drills into its recruits, on the other hand, is courage and decisiveness (the Singha Rifles motto, Nirbheetha Vegavath can be translated as With Speed and Courage). Shoot first and ask questions later. Then take your punishment like a man. That seems to be something that Sgt Vela — and perhaps the US Army at large — seemed to have forgotten. Vela’s team was asleep when it was discovered by the two Iraqis, and if they’d had a man on stag, the intruders would have been shot or warned off before they discovered the team. Once captured, the civilians should have been released, or if that was impossible, killed. The latter would still be a war crime, but Evan would have still been dealt with more leniently since his team was at risk. Planting evidence sealed his fate. In other words, dishonesty convicted him. Sgt Vela claims he asked his commanding officer for instructions and was ordered over the radio to shoot the prisoner. The fact that Vela was the only one convicted means that his CO denied this claim and the court believed him. Shades of My Lai — on March 16th 1968, a platoon of the US Army’s Americal Division murdered roughly five-hundred civilians, including old men, women and little children. Only the platoon commander, Lt William Calley was convicted; his company commander, Captain Ernest Medina, who Calley claimed gave the initial orders that sparked the massacre wasn’t charged. Calley received a life sentence, but was paroled after two years of home arrest. And Kokkadicholai — in January 1991 a SL Army platoon massacred between sixty-two and one-hundred and twenty-three civilians (depending on whose version you believe) in the Eastern Province village of Kokkadicholai. The platoon commander and nineteen soldiers were charged with the crime, and all twenty were acquitted. The platoon commander was later found guilty of dereliction of duty and losing control of his men, and dishonourably discharged from the service. No higher ranking officers ever faced charges.

Some would say that this dishonesty is a natural human trait, the desire to escape retribution for one’s crimes, and that’s true enough. However, an army is not a natural organisation. To quote Alfred de Vigny’s Servitude et Grandeur Militaire, “An army is a nation within a nation”. It is a nation in which normal civilian or even human laws don’t apply — there is no freedom of speech, no presumption of innocence, no right to ownership — and it’s citizens are subject to laws that would seem unbelievably draconian to a civilian. Every aspect of life in the Army is governed by official regulations — dress, food, shelter, hygene, language, marriage — and every regulation ultimately has but a single objective: to enable a commander to point his finger and say “Kill” and have that order instantly carried out. Given that focused need, one would assume that honesty would be regulated. And it is.

However, the intensity of that regulation decreases proportionately the further up the rank ladder one progresses. Young soldiers are constantly supervised, their every move scrutinised and regulated; right down to how long a daily shower may last — when I was in basic training it was three minutes. The same goes for subalterns; their dress, manners, and language, their leadership skills, are all constantly under close observation for command ability. But as officers and other ranks move up the rungs of rank, this scrutiny lessens, and freedom increases. Obviously, the reasoning is that with age and experience comes responsibility. And ambition; and there we have the rub. In the Army, as in any civilian corporation, there isn’t much room at the top, and ultimately three things decide whether a soldier will be a general — intelligence, ruthlessness, and luck. It’s very difficult to get to the top of a modern army without all of these three traits, and almost impossible without at least two.

Any link to scandal will prevent an officer in a modern army from reaching the top, and this increases the pressure to disassociate himself from the failures of his subordinates. This has been a natural phenomenon in modern armies, and an incentive for officers to cover up scandals. The SL Army, until recently, hasn’t really been a merit-driven force. Promotion came with time in service instead of success. Selection for the very highest of ranks was a political poker game with cards dealt by the political masters. The only thing a potential Army commander had to worry about was failure on his record — it didn’t matter if you’d been successful, as long as you’d not been unsuccessful. The appointing of Gotabhya Rajapakse as Secretary of Defence and the rise of Lt Gen Sarath Fonseka to Army commander has changed the face of the SL Army. Promotion is now very much a case of merit, with battlefield success crucial to upward movement. This, however, will not in any way change a potential general’s inclination to cover up a scandal, for it in fact will increase it as it becomes more of a race for rank rather than an arse-kissing competition.

Some might say that to ensure higher rank doesn’t cover up, is to crack down hard on those that do. Give out sentences on par with those that the the trigger men get. But on the other hand, that might make the brass just better at covering stuff up. So is closer scrutiny of the armed forces the answer? The Army’s notorious for being inscrutable to the outside world, and for this to work, an internal mechanism such as the Military Police might be the best instrument for overseeing the whole cross-section of the Army. In other words, a secret service on the lines of the Soviet GRU. Obviously, a rather extreme measure, and one not really suitable in a democratic country.

In the US and other western nations, atrocities such as My Lai and Abu Ghraib are received with shock by the general population, as something alien to their society. This is less pronounced in the Third World, where violence is something more integral to the civil psyche. The Sri Lankan population is well aware of its Army’s capacity for brutality, particularly after the putting down of the 1987-89 JVP insurrection. This brutality is seen as a necessary evil in order to rid society of a greater evil — separatism, communism, etc. Therefore it’s possible to conclude that in a naturally violent society, or one that tolerates violence, the prepropensity towards atrocity will be higher in the armed forces, which in the end, are a reflection of the civil populace.

Talking to an Indian colleague last year, the discussion turned towards the February 2007 Pakistani train bombing, and he suggested that it was highly likely the act had been committed by India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), and he didn’t seem to think it was a problem. Whilst reading that online article about Sgt Evan Vela’s conviction, I browsed through the comments forum that followed it, and was struck by the number of people who excused the sniper’s actions, and often defended it, reflecting the increasing acceptance by American society of the need for brutality in war; an acceptance that my Indian colleague, and most Sri Lankans seem to have already arrived at.

So is there any point in lamenting the brutality of war, the atrocities it spawns, and the unfairness with which it treats its victims? Is there any purpose in bringing in new laws for war, or greater accountability in the armed forces? I think not. In the end, the question isn’t whether we can breed a society that will not tolerate atrocities and brutality by its armed forces, but a society that will not tolerate war.

David Blacker was born in Colombo and has lived in Sri Lanka almost all of his life. He served as an enlisted soldier in the Sri Lanka Army in the early 1990s, seeing combat as a nineteen-year-old rifleman at Elephant Pass. He currently lives in Sri Lanka and works in advertising as a creative director.

Blacker’s novel “A Cause Untrue” won the Sri Lankan State Literary Award for Best Novel in 2006, and was shortlisted for the Gratiaen Prize 2004. It has also been nominated for the Dublin IMPAC Award 2007. It is published by PH Books and is available at all leading bookshops.

This post sent to Groundviews by the author.

Well known and senior trade union leader Bala Tampoe speaks on the war in Sri Lanka and the state of governance in the South.

He notes that even militarily defeating the LTTE does not mean guerilla warfare or their terrorist attacks against civilians in the South will cease. He goes on to note that:

“…on top of that they are talking about a political settlement. [The Rajapakse regime] can never achieve a proper political settlement till and until they recognise the right of self-determination, which is a democratic right, of the Tamil people and the Muslim people in the North and East, and establish some kind of proper constitutional basis for them to exercise that right within the framework of a democratic constitution. But they cannot have a democratic constitution in the first place when the rest of the country is under a Presidential Executive which amounts today to a virtual military police dictatorship under the Emergency.”