The State Department’s coordinator for counter terrorism visited Sri Lanka recently .Ambassador Cofer Black had met selected members of the press at a round table discussion He would have no doubt gone away pleased as it appears that the selected friendly journalists present had not pinned him down and had him reconfirm the statement of Christina Rocca, Assistant Secretary, who has gone on record at a Congress Hearing, as having stated that the ISGA was a blue print for the establishment of a separate state. We need also to have the views of the US government on the blackmail being indulged in by the LTTE which is demanding that the government negotiate only on the basis of their proposal to establish an ISGA -and that if the government does not agree, they will not be prepared to recommence peace talks. The US government which has proscribed the LTTE as a terrorist organization and considers them to be Fascist, should surely have a position both on the ISGA and also on this demand of the LTTE?
A former Foreign Service colleague Jayanath Rajapakse has in a recent article on the missed opportunity set out the following questions and stated that they were what should have been asked by the selected Journalists,
1 The LTTE insists that the talks should commence with the ISGA proposals as the basis, does the Ambassador consider this to be in good faith?
2 Expert opinion here is widely agreed that these ISGA proposals are a framework for a separate state. Us Assistant Secretary Christina Rocca took up much the same position, so does the Ambassador agree or has the US changed its position in this regard?
3) In the course of Rocca’s testimony before Congress listed the following LTTE actions that needed to be stopped, if they were to have been deemed to have renounced violence —— abducting children to serve the LTTE - securing arms from abroad - killing of political opponents
Does Ambassador Black too include these as being requirements when he refers to the LTTE "renouncing terrorism in word and deed?"
4) If the Ambassador’s answers point to lack of ‘good faith’ on the part of the LTTE what pressures could the US exert on the LTTE to make them mend their ways?
5) If the LTTE is in bad faith, then what is the purpose in the donor group exerting pressure on the government publicly to recommence negotiation, especially when they were broken off by the LTTE?
Yes, a ‘Statement ‘from the US covering these points would be more than useful to take the peace process forward. As stated earlier this was indeed the opportunity for the US to have made a categorical statement on the ISGA. Most unfortunately for this country the country does NOT come first with our two major political parties. The government changed in April and it has taken six months for two leaders to meet and that too does not appear to have been productive and we proudly boast that we are a working Democracy - many in the UNP are so completely opposed to the President personally that they let this hate get the better of their judgment; there is also the inner party rivalry within the UNP and the people of this country pay dearly because of their animosities. How could the international community help us if we are not prepared to help ourselves?
As for ‘Statements’ from the international community , none of them has been effective in reining in the LTTE, some have in fact been counter-productive, as far as we were concerned, (unless of course those who issued these ‘Statements’ wished to dignify the LTTE -by equating the government of Sri Lanka with an insurgent group (I have it from authority that Solheim demanded this of the Thais -the reader would recall how the Norwegian FM referred to Balasingham as "His Excellency Mr. Balasingham", I recall the reaction of a friend which bears recording "imagine the liberties these monkeys take with us".
The recent statements indicated either that those who issued them suffered from some acute form of Amnesia or were being diabolical. They were, by implication assisting the LTTE to slip out of the signed commitment they made at Oslo for a ‘Federal structure within a united Sri Lanka’. Prabhakaran is known to have hauled Balasingham over the coals over this -for he has only a one point agenda, which is Eelam. There is little doubt that the western donor group are allowing Solheim, the champion of Eelam, to call the tune for nowhere in any recent statement has this group referred to the ISGA -they conveniently keep calling upon us to commence Talks well aware that the LTTE has said that they would talk with the GOSL only on the basis of the ISGA. They are exerting maximum pressure on, nay blackmailing, the cash strapped government by stating that the 4.5 billion USD pledged at Tokyo (the aggregate of the amounts that would have been pledged at the annual ‘Development Forum’ meeting organized by the World Bank over the next four year period), would become available only if we resume negotiations - no pressure at all on the LTTE which pulled out on the 21st of April of last year on a flimsy excuse that nothing was happening on the ground to ameliorate the conditions of the Tamil people, well aware that there were over 640 projects in the pipe line and work was about to commence on them through the Sub Committee that was set up to address the immediate humanitarian needs in the North and East and the Triple R programme. When one considers the unreasonableness of the demand of the international community that we commence negotiations despite the LTTE’s conditions if development aid is to flow, one wonders as to whether there is some conspiracy against us, the price we pay for being divided and weak even in the face of a threat to our very existence as a single country. Ambassador Black has stated that his government +strongly supports the current peace process. He called upon the LTTE to resume peace talks (they are of course prepared but only on their own terms); Ambassador Black has stated that the LTTE would not be removed from their list of proscribed terrorist organizations until they renounce violence by word and deed As for the US strategy to counter terrorism he stated that they would "utilize all elements of state craft - commencing with Diplomacy and ending in a military response if all other methods fail; there is no question of where we stand, there will be no compromise, there will be no wavering" .He also stated "We support the government in its efforts to create peace". Yes, we could have peace tomorrow, if we agree to the ISGA - is this the ‘peace’ that the US and the other members of the donor community wish? No there can never be ‘peace’ on such terms. A just and lasting peace can be established only if the LTTE learn to compromise - and the LTTE does not know the meaning of that word for they have never ever compromised on anything.
There is only one language that the LTTE understands and that is force - not necessarily military force and this is where the international community, if their objective is to establish real peace in this country can play a role. Then they must change the road map. They must read the ‘Riot Act’ to the LTTE and call them to order. India and the donor community should factor in the threat to international peace and security that would stem from the sale of their perverse technology, their huge arms stock which includes double barrel rocket launchers and other sophisticated weapons systems, their extensive network for arms procurement and the use of their shipping networks for other than commercial purposes. As it is there is as serious threat to the security of the Indian Ocean region from the trafficking in and proliferation of small arms, from Piracy, from drug trafficking, trans-border terrorism, ethno-religious strife, insurgencies that receive support from external sources. The existence of these threats was recognized at the recently concluded BIMSTEC meeting in Bangkok and a working committee appointed to study the situation and suggest measures against terrorism in the region. Ambassador Black would of course have heard of the Sea Tigers of the LTTE, their demand for an exclusive zone in the Indian Ocean and how India considers them to be a serious threat to the security of the Ocean. Let us hope that the State Department’s coordinator for counter terrorism, Ambassador Black understands the situation well. There cannot be any more pussy-footing.
Let us, the people ask the donor group to make a categorical statement on what their position is on the ISGA do they think that it conforms to what was agreed to at Oslo? Do they agree with Secretary Rocca on what the ISGA is all about? Statements or pledges such as supporting Sri Lanka strongly, ring hollow unless something tangible is done. At the risk of seeming to be presumptuous may I suggest that India as the regional power take the initiative along with the US, Norway and the EU and summon a peace conference to which the main political parties in Sri Lanka and the LTTE should be requested to attend, recall the agreement at Oslo —a Federal structure within a united Sri Lanka which he LTTE signed up for. The Conference could examine the LTTE’s ISGA proposal; the previous governments counter proposal and the proposals of the present government. And the proposals of the Muslim community in the East and last but not least a Referendum MUST be held under international supervision to determine the status of the Eastern province, this is a democratic right of the people of the Eastern province and must be respected by the international community. A real peace would then emerge if India and the international community have the political will to ensure an end this conflict which has taken 60 000 lives and could take another 60 or more thousand lives, if left to the adversaries to resolve.
(http://www.island.lk/2004/09/15/features2.html)
