Blaming the government instead of the west

After the Geneva meeting there will be a competition among the opposition parties as well as some well wishers of the government to blame the government for the outcome at the UNHRC meeting. The outcome is pre decided and all that the government has to do is to expose the west and the UNHRC for what they are doing and will be doing in the future. Even after the  UNHRC meeting last year some who can be called supporters of the UPFA blamed the government for not having done what they call “homework”. What they did not realise was that irrespective of whether the government had done its homework, assigned by Navi Pillai and others at UN who work for USA on the payroll of somebody else,  Sri Lanka was bound to lose with the set up of the UN Organisation. It is mainly the so called educated people who would talk of homework and other such preparations that could have “avoided” any defeat for Sri Lanka.

The question that has to be asked is if Sri Lanka loses who wins at the UNHRC in Geneva. It is obviously the west led by US and England. England would have gone for a Sierra Leone type investigation but it is too early for such resolution. However, we will have to anticipate England to move a resolution along those lines next year or so but we should not take too much notice of it. It appears that the President has the correct attitude as he has said that he would not attach any value for the outcome of the UNHRC and would not take it seriously. The common man in the country unlike the educated is not bothered of the UNHRC meeting and those in the Southern Province and the Kalutara and Gampaha Districts would give a message to the whole world including the so called international on Saturday. Even in the Colombo District the results would not be much different with the UNP losing its power base further.

In this regard it is regrettable that the Catholic Church has asked the Catholics in the two provinces to give their preferential vote (manape) only to the Catholic candidates. Is the Catholic Church against religious reconciliation of the country. If the Mahanayake Theros had asked the Buddhists to give their preferential votes only for the Buddhist candidates one could imagine the protests by the peace lovers who repeat religious and other reconciliation like a mantra. In any event if the Buddhists give their manape  only for  the Buddhists, Catholics elected from Kalutara district and Southern Province would have to move into other districts in order to get elected. Just as much as peace lovers are not interested in peace, those who strive for religious reconciliation are not interested in any understanding between the Buddhists and the others in the country. So far Ranil-Chandrika group for religious reconciliation has not issued any statement on the request by the Catholic Church, and it makes it suspicious that in the name of religious reconciliation some groups with vested interests are working actually against it, the way the peace lovers did during the “thirty year war”.  

The UNHRC is not a human rights organisation, and is only a political tool of the west. It is not the human rights that matter and what the west does is to apply pressure on the non western government that do not subscribe to the views of the western countries politically, economically and culturally to change their policies to suit the western countries. As far as Sri Lanka is concerned the main objective of the western countries is to demean the Sinhala people and their culture, and the former use the dispersed Tamils, the NGO pundits, the peace vendors, some priests etc., to achieve what they want.

During the “thirty year war” the peace lovers were working against peace, and they wanted so called peace negotiations in order to prolong the “war” and make sure that the LTTE got what they wanted, without defeating the terrorist organisation, which had the tacit support of the western countries. The west may have banned the LTTE nominally but allowed the front organisations to function in various capacities. The irony is that it is those organisations who did not want the LTTE to be defeated, and who claimed that the terrorists were invincible, now in the forefront of blaming the government for not doing what it should have done in order to win the west in our favour.

This stand clearly exposes what the west and the peace lovers want. The western countries led by England and US wants power to be devolved to the northern and the Eastern Provinces, though the Tamils are not in a majority in the latter province, in order to solve the problem of so called discrimination against the Tamils by the Sinhalas and their governments. The Human rights are only a mock issue used to cover up the objective of the west. Could the west be genuine in protecting human rights when they promote Anandi whose husband was responsible for violation of human rights of so many including children. The recent arrest and release on bail of Ruki Fernando and a priest has angered the peace lovers again. It is the security forces and not the west or the peace lovers who are responsible for the security of the country and as long as the latter act according to the law of the country in arresting/releasing people what right the so called rights people have to interfere in the matters concerning security of the country.

The peace lovers go to town against these arrests simply because they know that the west is behind them and would come to rescue them if the need arises. These people who work for a fee paid in dollars or rupees as the case may be are merely the servants of the west.  What the peace lovers were interested then and interested now is the demeaning of the Sinhala people and their culture, and the talk of human rights is plain humbug. They blame the government for not moving beyond the thirteenth amendment, not implementing those recommendations of the LLRC, which are against the sovereignty of the country. Let Sri Lanka be defeated in Geneva without giving into what the west and the peace lovers want, and let the people give a verdict on Saturday on the decision of the UNHRC. The government should implement only what the people want and not what the UNHRC and the peace lovers want.

The “final” draft of the resolution against Sri Lanka is apparently now ready and the west has obtained the support of India who has not been a friend of Sri Lanka at least from the fifth century, by urging the government to investigate into the so called human rights violation of peace lovers among others, during the period 2002-2009. It is supposed to be the period covered by the LLRC, but India has insisted on this period only to avoid the activities of the IPKF when they were here having forced JR Jayawardhane to invite India to send armed forces in order to defend the Indo Lanka Accord. The Sri Lankan government should not investigate into segments of the “thirty year war”, and if at all it should be an investigation covering the entire period. It is much more preferable to appoint a Presidential Commission with powers to punish those found guilty, to investigate into the anti national activities not only of the terrorists, but also of peace lovers, their sponsors, godfathers and godmothers of the terrorists etc.

In this regard the Sri Lankan government should get together with Pakistan and other countries to move a resolution against US for violation of human rights in Afghanistan and other places by flying unmanned drones. If US decides to boycott the UNHRC because of the resolution against them it just shows the arrogance and use of force by that country but we should consider such boycotts, as welcome moves, by a country that rules the world through the hegemony of knowledge and of course the dollar, which again is a result of the bogus knowledge that the west has created.  

Nalin De Silva

26-03-2014