Could Sri Lanka have avoided the resolution

Sri Lanka is not only a small country but a country that has defied the big powers in world politics. The big powers are nothing but the two big Anglican (Anglo Saxon) countries that dominate the world in the economic, cultural and political fields. The two big bullies on either side of the Atlantic wanted President Rajapakse to allow Prabhakaran to leave the country, when he had been in Vanni surrounded by a human shield forced to come to the defense of the terrorist leader violating all forms of human rights that the UNHRC could think of, with the assistance of the western countries who merely play a subordinate role for the bullies in world politics, and nobody in good sense would have expected any forgiveness offered to Sri Lanka. If that happened then the rulers of the two countries would not have been in good sense. The first and foremost duty of the two Anglo Saxon Atlantic brothers is to safeguard the authority of the Christian Judaic culture and the hegemony of their political structures and the dominance of the financial capital in London.    

The resolution brought before the UNHRC by Navi Pillai’s office empowers the very same office to conduct an investigation into the so called human rights violations during the period 2002 – 2009, apparently the period that came under the scrutiny of the LLRC. It is not clear as to why this particular period was given to the LLRC to investigate but the two big bullies in order to obtain the support of India for their resolution has clung to this particular period so that they do not have to investigate the various acts of the IPKF. It is only a way to let India off the hook, for herself was bullying Sri Lanka not only during the period following the infamous Indo Sri Lanka Accord, but even before that by training the terrorists against Sri Lanka. It should be reminded to the UNP, which proclaims that the UNHRC resolution is not against the country but only against the “Rajapakse regime” in the words of Ranil Wickremesinghe picked up from NGO circles, that one could claim that India was training the terrorists only against the foreign policy of JR Jayawardhane. 

India (India came into existence as one country only after the English became a colonial power, but I am referring to all the dynastic kingdoms that existed as well, prior to the establishment of India as one country) has never been our friend at least from the fifth century, and it was due to the policies adopted by our kings that we were able to survive as a sovereign country living close to hostile kingdoms. It is true that under the Jayawardhane regime that included his nephew, if we go by the latter’s meaning of the term regime, the foreign policy of the government gave all the ammunition to India to revive its policy towards Sri Lanka, but the Sinhala people in general were against India for indulging in parippu (dhal) diplomacy. Of course the Sinhala people were against the Jayawardhane regime for signing the Indo Lanka Accord, but nobody said that it was a problem for the UNP to find a solution.

There are some people who are friends of the government who would say Sri Lanka could have avoided or defeated the UNHRC resolution only if our foreign office (external affairs ministry) had acted with diligence over the last few years. I am not a fan of the minister or the ministry, and I admit that the ministry has not done enough work to place our position before the world. However, I do not think that rational arguments would have mattered in this situation. It is clearly a political state of affairs where rational arguments do not hold. Leave alone world politics even in University politics it is not the rational arguments that win the day but brutal force emanating from power as the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Colombo who now heads the external affairs ministry would understand. Even in Physics sometimes the rational arguments and so called empirical facts are thrown out of the window as Einstein himself did when the measurements of the angle of deflection of light coming from a distant star situated behind the sun did not agree with his theory in the second decade of the twentieth century. He simply said that God has created the world according to his equations. He was in a sense using his civil power earned as a Theoretical Physicist in the previous decade.

Navi Pillai, in her report to the UNHRC had not acknowledged fully that she was allowed to visit Sri Lanka recently and what she saw during her visit. The development that has taken place in the Northern Province during a space of five years is not mentioned but she has not forgotten to mention the arrest of a priest named Praveen Maheshan and one Ruki Fernando who are supposed to be human rights activists. They were taken into custody under the existing law of the country and produced before a magistrate and then released on bail. What is wrong with the procedure in connection with this incident? It appears that the Navi Pillai and her office want the NGO activists to be above the law of the country and this itself illustrates the arrogance of the big bullies who pay for Pillai.

In this connection it has to be mentioned that Navi Pillai and the Vellala leaders in Sri Lanka have the same origin as Pillai’s ancestors and those of the Vellala leaders had been imported to South Africa and Sri Lanka respectively by the Dutch from the present South India. Navi Pillai nor anybody else for that matter is an impartial investigator and Pillai is paid by US for working for the Tamil racists, and Pillai from all accounts reported so far has not acted differently from other Tamil racists.  

The NGOs were established in the sixties after the African countries were given some sort of political freedom. These organisations though called non governmental,  are maintained directly or indirectly by the western governments. The main function of the NGOs is to propagate the ideology of the west in the Asian African and South American countries. The west holds ideological hegemony through these organisations as well, and it is found in Sri Lanka the so called rights activists including peace lovers are mainly non Buddhists/Muslims. The west maintains the NGOs and then quotes reports by their paid servants as if they serve independent organisations.

The NGOs have found a way of getting the dead to procreate the dead. Usually it is the living people who procreate living people but in the case of NGOs maintained by the west the dead procreate dead according to some mechanism unknown to western science. One report would claim that the number of dead people among the Tamils during the last phase of the humanitarian operations is 5000. Soon after another report would tell us the figure is 10000. The figure increases with time as dead cannot “die” again (it is only the living who can die, once a dead always a dead), and reduce the figure, and it is clear that the figure would reach 100,000 very soon.

In answering the question we raised, namely whether Sri Lanka could have avoided or defeated the resolution by diplomatic means and rational arguments all that can be said is it is not possible to do so. The two big bullies want to punish the “Rajapakse Regime” and violation of human rights is only an excuse to intervene. Even if no civilian died during the humanitarian still there would have been charges of violation of human rights, and on the other hand, if Prabhakaran was allowed to escape,  there would not have been any report by Navi Pillai. The way the west  We should not bother of the outcome of the vote at UNHRC as it is nothing but politics, and all that we have to do is to get ready for the future. The west will attempt to topple the government by hook or crook, through various springs including an economic sanction spring, and it is the duty of the government to prepare the people for all the possible springs and turn them to winters for the bullies.  

Nalin De Silva

28-03-2014