The government has decided to ban
sixteen front organisations of the LTTE. This is something that the government
should have done long time ago but it is a welcome move even if it is somewhat
late. It is hoped that the relevant gazette notification is published without
undue delay and the government does not change its mind after receiving advice
from pundits on human rights to the contrary. Perhaps the government did not
take this step earlier as there was no evidence of the LTTE reviving its
activities then. However, with the Gopi incident and the implications it had on
Ruki Fernando and the priest Praveen and of course Vijeyakumari the government
would have thought enough is enough.
The banning of these organisations as
“foreign terrorist” organisations is ironically under the UN resolution 1373,
which was passed by the UN soon after the so called September attack in the
USA. In Sri Lanka there was no one such attack as we were under continuous attacks
from the LTTE almost on a daily basis, and hence we do not have a specific
September eleven. All days are September elevens as far as we are concerned but
the west always ignored this basic fact. According to the resolution 1373 the
governments that have signed it have to assist each other and since all the
sixteen organisations operate from USA, England and other western countries the
response of these countries would be interesting to be studied. Further the
proscription of these organisations come in the wake of the UNCHR resolution
against Sri Lanka engineered by England as confirmed by the state minister for
external affairs of that country, and moved by USA. These two countries are
responsible for allowing some major LTTE front organisations to function on
their soil.
The proscription forbids Sri Lankan
nationals to have any links with any member of the banned organisations. Of
course, legal pundits would attempt to circumvent these restrictions by unusual
definitions of membership etc., but they will be exposed in due course. The illegal
luminaries could even think of human rights of the members of the front
organisations to engage in activities to win freedom for the Tamils. This they
would say include activities against the Sri Lankan state and that freedom
struggles are not terrorist activities. We would have to await the response of
the host countries of the banned organisations, and of course Tamil Nadu to the
proscription. However, we should not forget that many of the NGOs sponsored by
the western governments directly or indirectly and some political analyst and
sociologist pundits refused to call the LTTE a terrorist organisation, and as
far as they were concerned the terrorists were freedom fighters. Already some
NGO pundits have commented on lack of so called hard evidence against the
sixteen organisations mentioning that it would be difficult to convince the
western countries without such evidence.
We all know that the LTTE was equipped
with the most modern weapons and had enough funds to organise a terrorist
outfit to fight the Sri Lankan armed forces. The LTTE was not armed with
“galkatas” and the million dollar question is who provided the funds to the
terrorists. Only two sources come to mind. Firstly we have the front
organisations of the LTTE and secondly the western governments and the India
government. We have to forget the NGO activists, as the funds they receive from
their masters and mistresses in the west are not sufficient to donate
sufficient money to the terrorists.
What is the hard evidence that the
western governments and their paid servants in the NGOs would need to convince
the host governments. It is the host governments that have all the evidence
having access to the bank accounts and other transactions of the front
organisations and unless the host governments themselves have pumped money to
the front organisations the former should corporate with the Sri Lankan
government to stop the front organisation raising funds to kill innocent people
in Sri Lanka. The response of the western governments would reveal how much
they are involved in not only raising funds for the terrorists but also
maintaining the sixteen proscribed organisations in their countries.
Under the proscription according to the
UN resolution 1373 it is forbidden for Sri Lankans to be in contact with
members of the banned organisations, and obtain funds from such organisations. This
would make things difficult for some political organisations in Sri Lanka, and
naturally they would be against the proscription. The responses not only from
the western countries but also from individuals and organisations in Sri Lanka
would reveal their involvement in terrorist activities. Of course they would
hide behind human rights and other rights, and would never claim that they
support terrorist activities in Sri Lanka.
The external affairs minister of England
has requested the Sri Lankan government to corporate to implement the UNHRC
resolution against Sri Lanka. The question that has to be asked is to corporate
with whom. Obviously it is not a resolution moved by an impartial God but a
resolution instigated by the western countries, which have been harbouring people
such as Adele Balasingham and allowing the front organisations of the LTTE to
operate. Sri Lankan government on the other hand would request these countries to
corporate to implement the proscription of the sixteen organisations, and it
would naturally create problems for the west.
What is the hard evidence that the
western countries led by England and USA have on violation of human rights by
the Sri Lankan armed forces? The only evidence that they have is that contained
in the various reports such as that was named after Darusman. These reports are
not based on any proper investigation but on “evidence” supplied by people such
as Bishop Rayappu Joseph who can only talk only of eyewitnesses without naming
them. Of course, they would say that they could not reveal the names of their
witnesses for fear of the lives of the latter, but if Rayappu Joseph can live
without any fear it is unthinkable how the lives of the “eyewitnesses” would be
in danger, especially when the west is monitoring, if not supporting their
activities. The reports use the method of “procreation of the dead by the dead”,
with each report increasing the number of deaths due to violation of human
rights sated in the previous report.
To those NGO pundits who think the UPFA
is in bad shape after deciding to proscribe the front organisations of the LTTE
having lost its power base during the Provincial Council elections held
recently and who continue to think that Hirunika Premachnadra secured the most
number of preferential votes in the Colombo District because the voters did not
prefer a so called Chauvinistic
candidate, all that has to be said is that Hirunika was the candidate of the
President and not of a so called old guard of the LTTE, just as much the “Chauvinistic”
candidate was, and that there have been
people who voted for both Hirunika and the so called Chauvinistic candidate, as
anybody familiar with simple arithmetic learnt in the primary school would
realise. If they have forgotten simple arithmetic there is nothing that can be
done to raise their level of understanding. In any event, it has to be
mentioned that the Sinhala nationalistic vote has increased as nobody could
claim that the DF of SF or the JVP are against the defeat of the LTTE. The UNP
on the other hand has decreased its vote base among the Sinhalas, and the
proscription of the front organisations of the LTTE would further strengthen
the SLFP led UPFA whatever the “international community” and their paid
servants may think of.
Nalin De Silva
04-04-2014
