Kath Noble’s cry of victory for America on its resolution against Sri Lanka

Kath  Noble  in her article “  Sri Lanka’s defeat “  to the Island on 27 March, 2013, states ,
“The UN Human Rights Council sessions ended last week with the passage of another resolution on Sri Lanka. It was a victory for the United States, which secured 25 votes in favour compared to 13 against, with eight abstentions and the representative from Gabon being recorded as AWOL.”

Any one  from West would readily claim  that the  passing of the US Resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC in Geneva, is a victory to the USA and the West, what ever that victory means to them, and a defeat to Sri Lanka the hide they take all the trouble to beat.  But they cry victory too soon without analysing the out come to see whether it was really a victory. All that the  USA and its allies wanted was a victory whatever was the substance of the resolution. But, looking closely at how the voting had gone, the West’s  cry of victory  rings hollow.

Let us see who voted in favour of the US Resolution :      
Austria,   Czech Republic, Estonia,  Germany, Ireland,Italy,Montenegro  Poland, Romania, Spain. Moldova, and Switzerland (12 countries  of the European block ) and USA.(1)  Benin, Ivory Cost, Sierra Leone ( 3 African Countries,) Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Guatemala , Peru, ( 6 South American Countries), India, Libya, Korea (3 countries that follow USA  for special reasons.) (25 Countries)
Who voted Against the US Resolution:  Indonesia, Maldives,  Philippines,  Thailand,Pakistan( 6 Asian Countries)  Uganda, Congo, Mauritania (3 African Countries) Cuba, Ecuador, Venezuela(1  Caribbian and 2 South American) Qatar, Kuwait,  UAE, ( 3 Middle Eastern Countries) (13 Countries)

Who abstained: Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Kenya,(5 African countries) Japan, Malaysia, Kazakhstan (3 Asian and Central Asian Country) (8 Countries)

Absented: Gabon.

Abstaining  and not being preset to  vote were an acknowledgement of  refusal to follow the US sponsored resolution, and a show of sympathy with Sri Lanka. Therefore the US resolution was refused by these nine Countries,  adding these to the 13 countries which  voted against the Resolution means there were 22 votes against the American resolution which was cosponsored by the Western countries.

Most of the South American countries are under the influence of USA  therefore  it is no surprise they voted  with America.  Libya has  an American puppet government. Thus USA had 20 votes of their own group of Countries.  Other than those countries America found only 5  countries (3 African countries plus Korea and India) supporting  its resolution.  Therefore, it was  not a great victory for America, which has lost its popularity  outside its own circle of countries. The US resolution in that equation  did not have  the support of  countries outside American influence, and therefore it is a victory for Sri Lanka as  those countries other than those “American Group” of countries, did not support the US call for :
(1)  advice and technical assistance of the UNHCHR to promote reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka
(2).. the establishment of a truth-seeking mechanism.,
(3). to conduct an independent and credible investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as applicable.
(4).. to cooperate with special procedures mandate holders and to respond formally to their outstanding requests, and  extend invitations  to them and provide them access;
(5).. Encourages the Office of the High Commissioner and relevant special procedures mandate holders to provide, in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps;
(6)… Requests the Office of the High Commissioner, with input from relevant special procedures mandate holders, as appropriate, to present an oral updateto the Human Rights Council at its twenty-fourth session, and a comprehensive report  followed by a discussion at the twenty-fifth session, on the implementation of the present resolution

USA  had proof of its unpopularity and the voting was not an encouragement  for USA to pursue its  anti Sri Lanka campaign, which is against all norms of democracy and done without any political wisdom, only for reasons of a political strategy which is evident from Americas repeated effort of coming year after year ,  harassing  Sri Lanka on the self same issues.

Therefore Kath Nobel’s blowing a horn of victory for US Resolution is assuming victory too soon.  In reality the US resolution has failed to interest the delegates at the 22 session of UNHRCouncil.
Sri Lanka has nothing to learn from the one sided resolution which is only trying to impede the progress of Sri Lanka in the right direction.  The delegates of the  Countries of the Middle  East voted against the US resolution not as Muslims, but as delegates representing their countries.  Therefore Kath Noble dragging in Bodu Bala Sena to warn Sri Lanka of a possible disaffection of the “Muslim” countries in the Middle East in their votes in future US resolutions against  Sri Lanka seems an attempt to  create a rift between those countries and Sri Lanka.

Bodu Bala Sena is not against the Muslim Countries, it is against a new “fundamentalist”  trend amoung the Muslims in Sri Lanka which had not been evident in the past, which some Buddhists fear  would create a Communal dissension between the Sinhala and the Muslim who had been living  without any  serious disaccord, and it is only their wish to nip a growing  danger to communal unity in the bud.  In fact the Embassy of USA in Sri Lanka  has information of 4 Islamic fundamentalist Groups working in Sri Lanka.

It is not only in Sri Lanka  that this new “fundamentalist” trend has surfaced, but the European countries too are at the moment in the throes of such an unexpected change of attitude of the Muslim communities that had been living hitherto in harmony with other communities. 

Kath Noble is perhaps not aware that it had been the Sinhala Buddhists who had suffered most from the Colonial rulers who had swept aside Buddhism and the Buddhist culture. The anti- Buddhist  mentality of the British colonial rulers changed only after  the coming to Sri Lanka of  Henry Steel Olcott , an American Buddhist.  After the independence it was only after 1956 that the Sinhala people had been able to give back  to their religion and their culture  the prestige and its rightful place . 

Therefore, if there is going to be any danger to  Buddhism coming from whatever  quarter the Sinhala Buddhists will certainly rise in protest.   It  happened before with the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka setting up  Catholic Action, which gave rise to the Lanka Jathika Bala Mandalaya.

The terrorism was not only a danger  to the Sinhala Buddhist Culture, but a challenge to Sri Lanka’s unitary Status.  The Buddhists had always accommodated other religions, but it  is only when other religions making use of the pacifist attitude of the Sinhala Buddhists invent new laws and customs  hitherto not practices  at the cost of Buddhism loosing its rightful place in Sri Lanka that they rise to challenge such manipulations.

Kath Noble States, “ The Bodu Bala Sena, which is entirely comprised of people who consider any comment on what goes on in Sri Lanka by non-Sri Lankans as tantamount to an invasion, will pretend that it hasn’t noticed. Since it claims not to notice much more obvious things – such as that Sinhalese not only aren’t in danger of being wiped out but are actually increasing their share of the population in Sri Lanka, even without the help of retrograde bans on contraception – this should come as no surprise.” 

This is a strange statement, the increase or the decrease of the population of the Sinhala people  has nothing to do with the protection of a Culture and way of living practiced hitherto.

 Noticing the voting pattern in Geneva would make it difficult to continue with its ridiculous and totally destructive campaign against Sri Lanka. The countries of the Middle East which voted against the US resolution  will not turn against the Government of Sri Lanka for the action taken by an Organisation which has no connection with the Government.

The Muslims also have their  organisations to protect their religious rights and why not  Buddhists have their organisations to protect the rights of the Buddhists ?  It is needless for outsiders to meddle into such matters to  incite the Muslims  against Buddhists and make it a political issue affecting the Muslim countries of the Middle East, using as a tactic to get the countries in the Middle East to vote for the next US resolution against Sri Lanka next year..

Kath Noble says “Unfortunately, the Government is not much more intelligent.”

The Government’s intelligence is not measured by the Organisations of the people who have the democratic right to do so  in order to keep the people alive to dangers  to their religion and culture.
She goes on to add, “ Muslim countries may not choose to express their concern via the Human Rights Council – or not yet, anyway – but they are certainly worried. They said as much in a very carefully worded letter to the Government just days before the vote in Geneva.

Mahinda Rajapaksa must take note, before Sri Lanka is completely isolated internationally.”

Mahinda Rajapakse need no advice from Kath Noble to learn how to keep  Sri Lanka safe, without being completely Isolated ?  On the contrary, without Kath Noble’s reminder,  Mahinda Rajapaksa has expanded Sri Lanka’s diplomatic  relations with more countries than it had ever before.  Those countries  have no ulterior motives to break up Sri Lanka as a  political strategies.

West may continue its effort to  isolate Sri Lanka from the rest of the World, but it is the West that is loosing the highly respected place it had amoung the developing countries before their undue interference in the affairs of developing countries by arming  rebels for their agenda of regime change.  Sri Lanka has no difficulty in finding new friends, and also keep the old even if the West uses underhand activities through their agents, and lackeys to create dissention  amoung the Communities in  the country.

Kath Noble refers to a passage from  Dayan Jayatillake’s latest book and states,  “ separatism would have been dead and buried if Mahinda Rajapaksa had done what he promised and followed the military defeat of the LTTE with a generous political settlement. But he chose to delay, if not drop the idea altogether.”

Dayan Jayatilleke thinks that , “There had to be a shift of national emphasis and priority, to the international front”.  That would only created more problems if Sri Lanka were to decide its future, political and social development projects not to suit the country, but to satisfy the International front.

Intellectuals are not practical, therefore they could only give theoretical explanations to the present  situation Sri Lanka is faced with internationally. But Mahinda Rajpakse is a practical man with a shrewd political intuition that has stood well so far. 

The International interference would not have ended by a “generous” devolution of political power to the Tamils, because the USA led  International Community’s main concern is not with the Tamil people, but with its own  political agenda. 

Therefore the USA led International Community which could not intervene to save the terrorist from being eliminated would have even if there was a “ generous  political settlement” after the war, continued to interfere with Sri Lanka accusing it for one thing or another,  as  the terrorism in Sri Lanka did not transform into a situation  like it was  with the  rebels in Bengazi.

International Community would have been happy if they could have called the Sri Lanka terrorists, “rebels” and supported them along with the NATO forces, to oust the Mahinda Rajapakse government and murdered him like they murdered Colonel Gaddafi of Libya, for a real regime change.  That may have been their plan and the International community having failed in that, will continue to interfere into Sri Lanka at different UN Forums until they will be able to bring about some how other  a regime change in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem cannot be determined  “in the international theatre”, as they are strangers to  Sri Lanka’s culture and the way of thinking. It is not by separating the Tamil people from the rest of the people in Sri Lanka and giving them separate political power  that the ethnic problem of Sri Lanka could be solved.  It  is  by integrating all communities to one whole Nation that Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem could be solved.  The USA and the Western pandits refuse to understand that in what ever language it is told, as their interest is not in the people but  in Sri Lanka’s strategic geographic situation, to counter the Chinese advance in to the ocean around Sri Lanka.

The Tamil people in Sri Lanka has no interest in what happens in Tamil Nadu, it is only the Tamil National Alliance that makes an issue of it for its own political gain.  TamilNadu may perhaps have other motives such as breaking away from India to set up a separate State of Tamil Nadu and annex the North and East of Sri Lanka.  But the Sri Lanka Tamil people will not agree to such a situation knowing TamilNadu’s rigid caste system.  All the Tamils of Sri Lanka for whom the TamilNadu Tamils now shed tears and self-immolate, would  be low caste in the TamilNadu  caste setup.

Kath Noble goes on to say that, “ During and immediately after the conflict, the world compared its actions to those of the LTTE and took decisions accordingly. It got away with a lot because it was up against a ruthless terrorist organisation that killed both Tamils and Sinhalese, ordinary villagers, human rights activists and political leaders as well as members of the armed forces, and in particular also the leaders of other countries.”

Kath Noble quotes  further from Dayan Jayatillake’s book a part of which is, “ . The lesson was that the Sri Lankan state had to catch up, get with the new calendar and new times, and learn to speak a new language. ‘Bush-speak’ had no acceptance outside the USA even during his administration and now it is rejected within the USA itself and has no resonance anywhere in the world. Sri Lanka’s dominant discourse had to change or it would lose the global struggle by simple default. “

Kath Noble states, “Looking at what has happened since then, it would appear that the experience had the opposite effect on Mahinda Rajapaksa. The Government has moved more recklessly than ever in exactly the same direction. If Muslim countries were to abandon Sri Lanka, the descent into hell would surely be even further accelerated.”  And advises, “That too is a defeat for Sri Lanka, which should now be focusing all of its attention on rebuilding the country, both physically and psychologically.”

Lot of persons have  come forward to say how Mahinda Rajapakse should govern his country.  But Mahinda Rajapakse is a good listener and knows what to accept and what to reject.

USA State Department may take the advice of Dayan Jayatilleke quoted by Kath Noble and “  get with the new calendar and new times, and learn to speak a new language. ‘Bush-speak’ had no acceptance outside the USA even during his administration and now it is rejected within the USA itself and has no resonance anywhere in the world. “  

USA is preparing to send spacemen to Mars, but still remains with the age old Cowboy mentality.

Does Sri Lanka need a US Resolution for it to continue to do what it is doing to reconcile the Communities and rebuild the country after 30 years of Terrorism ?

Though the  President of USA Barack Obama’s father was from a developing country, the President is not interested in poor developing countries, preferring to hobnob with the  White Nations of the West, and those prosperous Nations in  Asia.  He visited India perhaps for political reasons and because pandering it  would help US political strategy against China.

Kenya which he visited as the country of his father and where he met his relatives was not so much to his liking. In one of his books he says that his wife Michelle  coming back after  visiting Kenya said she was happy to have got away to find her America where she is comfortable and happy.

Hillary Clinton made a special trip to South India to meet Jayalalitha probably first to encourage  Jayalalitha’s anti Sri Lanka stance and also perhaps as a leverage in case a US State Foreign policy may change to breakup India as it did to Russia.  Robert O’Blake who recently said that he had known Sri Lanka for six years and considers he is a friend of Sri Lanka, did not arrange Hillary Clinton to come to Sri Lanka and see for her self Sri Lanka after terrorism.

America’s Foreign Policy remains the same who ever is the President.  The President Barack Obama will have to follow the State Department, and the State Department will not  follow the President Barack Obama.  America’s foreign policies are not even made by the Secretary of State but by people like Robert O’Blake  who comes from George Bushe’s era. 

American governments  had been  from the very beginning  trying to assert its National identity first fighting against the American aborigine Indians , then in secessionist wars, and now asserting its world leadership stumping underfoot the developing countries. 

In recent times it helped rebels in Bengazi to oust Colonel Gaddafi, it helps rebels in Syria to oust Asad. And now with regard to Sri Lanka it is helping the pro-terrorist Tamil diaspora to oust the Government in Sri Lanka. The US resolution against Sri Lanka is without any valid substance.  It has been presented merely to  undermine the efforts of  a fast developing Sri Lanka, to discourage its efforts to reconcile the communities and go  forward as a progressive nation, without being dependent on USA or its allies of the West. 

USA does not want any third world  country to develop.  It even  tried to stop the development of China,  recognizing Taiwan as representative of the Chinese people and keeping Peoples Republic of China out of the UNO.

Later on USA and the West   gave  Tiananmen  square protest in China  undue publicity  expecting it would be the beginning of  the break up of China. The cold war against Russia was planned to break up USSR.  These are the tactics of USA purposely designed to keep away any Nation competing against Americas “established” leadership.  USA would allow countries to develop to a certain limit subject to their being  dependent on USA and the West. USA keeps Cuba inhumanly under trade embargos hoping it would succumbed to Americas superiority.  That is America’s  slave driving mentality.

USA made a big show  at the UNHRCouncil in Geneva to bring a resolution against Sri Lanka,  a small country which was terrorized by a group of terrorists trained by India purposely to breakup the country and annex the North and East of it as a Tamil Eelam State. USA went all out to help the terrorists to force the government to surrender to them.  Robert O’Blake’s repeated attempts to dissuade the Sri Lanka Government from using a military solution to settle the terrorist problem was a planned project of the US State Department.

Having failed to make Sri Lanka comply to its agenda, USA State Department now seeks  to divide Sri Lanka by  making use of its pretended  interest in the Sri Lanka  Tamil Community , and accusing Sri Lanka for its just war against terrorism.  It has selected only a part of the  military operations against terrorism to make accusations against Sri Lanka and its Armed Forces. It has conveniently left out the previous  30 years of terrorism to avoid  accusing terrorists and those who aided and abetted the terrorists in those atrocious years of terror. 

There being nothing  justifiable to  present a resolution against Sri Lanka, US state Department  held on to a biased anti Sri Lanka report presented by Navineetham Pillay who is not objective and independent in her position as the Commissioner of the UNHRCouncil.  She  being a Tamil her sympathies are with the eliminated terrorists of Tamil origin, and therefore biased against Sri Lanka Government and its Armed Forces. 

Her report is based on a questionable report made by a panel appointed by the Secretary General of UNO for his personal use.  The Panel did not visit Sri Lanka in preparing the report, but depended on documents, and evidence presented to it by the pro terrorist Tamil expatriates.

 US resolution against Sri Lanka is a paradox. The resolution states in its preamble,

 “ Reaffirming also that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law, as applicable,”  

What a hypocrisy ?

Is  USA following these strictures it makes   against Sri Lanka, in its wars against terrorism in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria far away from America? In Pakistan  40 000  civilians have been killed in drone attacks-is it within human rights Law ?

Then the  US resolution goes on to give advice (which it does not follow), first by acknowledging the work so far done by the Government of Sri Lanka, adds to it :

“…..noting nonetheless that considerable work lies ahead in the areas of justice, reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts.” 

Has USA that devastated Iraq, and Libya in their search for terrorists in the first and to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi in the second, gone back to those countries to reconstruct what it destroyed to allow the civilian population to resume their normal lives ?    

Next  item in the resolution  is a groping in the dark without knowing the intentions of the Sri Lanka governments in appointing the LLRC,   and states,

“………….Taking note of the National Plan of Action to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of the Government of Sri Lanka …………Noting that the national plan of action does not adequately address all of the findings and constructive recommendations of the Commission. “

This is a wrong interpretation of the LLRC recommendations.  The intention of the government is only to make it a catalyst to search essential ways and means to avoid  perpetuating the existing compartmentalisation of the Communities, but bring all the communities together, whether they are Sinhala ,Tamil or Muslim to be united together as Sri Lankans. In order to make a reality of that intention only selected recommendations  of the LLRC could be implemented to help in the greater task of building a Nation.

The US resolution  demonstrates the inability of the USA to understand the underlying principle for which the LLRC was appointed.  It also shows that a foreign country  not conversant with the culture and social structure of the people of another country  is unable to understand the reasons behind another nations progressive actions. USA  jumps to accuse Sri Lanka having failed to understand  the  Sri Lankan way of  reacting to a cultural and a social  situation. 

The US resolution  continues to elaborate whole series of  issues the Government of Sri Lanka is quite aware of and is preparing to solve these problems adequately at its own pace in view of the fact that the Government is dealing with a people who had undergone  a perilous period of fear and uncertainty,  and is still in the throes of psychological fear of what it suffered under terrorism., which US and its allies  foreign to the way of thinking of a people will never understand.

The USA and its allies, insults the intelligence of the Government of Sri Lanka and its Armed Forces which without their advice, help or assistance fought on its own, adopting appropriate war strategies to defeat the aims of ruthless terrorists  and eliminated them in a fair military operation.

 Devolution of political authority is not what the ordinary Tamil people demand, it is the demand of the egoist Tamil politicians who are “descendents” of the defunct terrorists. USA and its allies  have got the wrong “picture” of Sri Lanka and has the pretention to teach Sri Lanka what are its duties to its people.

“Calling upon the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfil its public commitments, including on the devolution of political authority, which is integral to reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all members of its population “,

USA in the  absence of any reasons on which to accuse Sri Lanka, resorts to the biased report of Navineetham Pillay the UNCHR  to state:

“Noting the High Commissioner’s call for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law,”

Why should there be a credible International  investigation  when the Government of Sri Lanka  has already done an adequate investigation to attend to whatever sufferings the war against terrorists had caused to the civilian population. The fact that such findings are considered not credible by the USA and its Allies is not surprising as they look at it from their own point of view.  Sri Lanka belongs to the people of Sri Lanka and it is to their satisfaction that investigations should be carried out to redress any wrongs the war has caused to them.

US State Department has  burrowed the defective report of the Office of UNHCHR, which itself is not based on facts but on a report of a Panel appointed by the Secretary General of UNO for his own purposes. The  defect of that report comes from the fact that the  Panel did not move away from their comfortable office at the UNO and collected documents from pro terrorist websites and hearsay evidence from the anti Sri Lanka  terrorist Front Organisations of the  Tamil Diaspora.  None of the facts stated in the report of the Panel is substantiated  with eyewitness accounts or examination of the venue ware the violation of human rights is said to have taken place.

The item one of the US resolution based on these absurdities reads:

“1. Welcomes the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on advice and technical assistance for the Government of Sri Lanka on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka[1] and the recommendations and conclusions contained therein, in particular on the establishment of a truth-seeking mechanism as an integral part of a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to transitional justice;”

It is just meaningless verbiage and says nothing  factual.  Why should Sri Lanka now seek advice and technical assistance from foreigners, who did not come forward to give Sri Lanka any technical advise when Sri Lanka needed them during the military operations against the terrorists ?

What advice and technical assistance could they give to Sri Lanka when Sri Lanka is well equipped with knowledgeable people and perhaps with a higher IQ than any foreign technician, and can  do without them to bring the Communities together and settle  difference in intelligent dialogue. 

The country needs no truth seeking mechanism as neither the Government of Sri Lanka nor the people engaged in reconciling the communities have anything to hide.  The problem is only with the US  State Department and its Allies, whose relentless  interference to accuse  Sri Lanka for its elimination of terrorism four years ago  hampers its programme of  development and the unification of the people.

The second item in the US Resolution reads:

2. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations made in the report of the Office of the High Commissioner, and also calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka to conduct an independent and credible investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as applicable;

Sri Lanka does not trust the UNHCHR and her report which the US resolution refers to as a panacea to solve problems of Sri Lanka. Her “cut and pasted” report  is not worth the paper on which it has been written.  The US State Department should stop talking about the Human Rights Law and the International Humanitarian law as USA acts in breach of those laws with impunity with its Armed Forces posted in foreign countries, looking for Al Qaida terrorists. USA stands as the police man of the developing world without any one to questions its own deplorable breach of all Human Rights and  Humanitarian laws. 

Sri Lanka has ended terrorism in its own country with its own Armed Forces, and rescued 300 000 of its own people  held forcibly by the terrorists. Sri Lanka  is not answerable to any one for deaths of “Civilians” which in USA parlance is “ collateral damage”. If that explanation is good for the “goose it is also good for the gander”.

Those civilians who voluntarily stayed with the terrorists  were aiding and abetting the terrorists and Sri Lanka is not responsible for the death of such “civilians”

The next item in the US resolution is the most ridiculous.  It  states:

3. Reiterates its call upon the Government of Sri Lanka to implement effectively the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and to take all necessary additional steps to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and commitment to initiate credible and independent actions to ensure justice, equity and accountability, and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans;

It demands Sri Lanka to implement the report prepared by its own LLRC. US State Department  as usual is unable to understand all the  implications of the issues in Sri Lanka.  The LLRC was appointed to study the terrorist situation and the conflict that ended with the elimination of the terrorists.  The LLRC was not mandated to make recommendations.

The recommendations they had nevertheless made cannot be implemented without taking into consideration other vital factors that ensues the end of a 30 year struggle and a suffering of the people.  The Government has to evaluate the situation and forge a different progressive path of development, reconciliation and unity. That is some thing that had to be undertaken by people who understand the culture , customs, and social values of different communities. 

It is therefore some, thing that had to be undertaken by the government of Sri Lanka and not at the behest of  the USA and its allies or Navineetham Pillay.  This was well spelt out by the president immediately after the elimination of terrorism, when he said “ there are no more minorities and a majority, but there are only good or bad Sri Lankans”. 

This is a profound philosophical statement made by a generous man who would not hesitate  giving up every thing  for the betterment of his country and its people. It is  a clarion call for an essential unity.  This the Americans, the West or the separatist Tamil Diaspora will not understand. 

It is better they take a moment to understand what it involves.  This makes the US resolution against Sri Lanka a worthless impediment to a greater project the President  and the Government of Sri Lanka has in mind  for the people of Sri Lanka.  Implementation of the US Resolution to the letter will only help separatist politics putting one community against the other when what is needed to day is Unity of all Communities.

The next two items, propose continued interference  into Sri Lanka’s reconciliation and development efforts.  If it is allowed Sri Lanka would only be a subject State of USA and the West.   Sri Lanka should refuse any mandate holders or interfering NGOs or specialists into Sri Lanka, either by invitation or as visiting dignitaries.  We have had enough of interference from the USA and the West ever since we rid ourselves of the terrorists.  None of them came to our  rescue then , therefore there is no reasons to invite these “disasters” into, our midst now.

4. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to cooperate with special procedures mandate holders and to respond formally to their outstanding requests, including by extending invitations and providing access;

5. Encourages the Office of the High Commissioner and relevant special procedures mandate holders to provide, in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps;

The last item in the US resolution is to bind Sri Lanka to their “ beck and call”,  making  Sri Lanka a subject Nation.  If this is allowed we will have this self same comedy being enacted at the UNHRCouncil in Geneva every year in and year out, until Sri Lanka or USA and its allies put an end to it.

Therefore, it is best that Sri Lanka take the initiative to end it refusing to cooperate with the UNHRC.  The resolution if allowed to stand will see the end of the reconciliation of Communities , encourage enhanced   activities by the separatists Tamil expatriate groups against the Unity of Communities to  take the Nation forward, and perhaps revive terrorism once again in Sri Lanka. 

6. Requests the Office of the High Commissioner, with input from relevant special procedures mandate holders, as appropriate, to present an oral updateto the Human Rights Council at its twenty-fourth session, and a comprehensive report  followed by a discussion at the twenty-fifth session, on the implementation of the present resolution

In considering the whole of the US resolution against Sri Lanka, it is evident that it is going to be an annual exercise of the US State Department and its Western allies against Sri Lanka, therefore, the US Resolution against Sri Lanka is only good to be thrown into the waste paper basket.

It is not just and fair that USA that is violating  human rights, human rights Law and International Humanitarian Law in its different theatres of war  go scot free without any one making any resolutions against America’s blatant violation of human rights. Sri Lanka should propose China, Russia and the SAARC to set up a Committee to make America answerable for its violation of human rights, in Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Afghanistan and helping  rebels arming them and assisting them to fight against Governments in place.

Please do not say any more India is a friend of Sri Lanka.

One cannot understand the naivety , and simple stupidity of  Sri Lanka ‘s inability  to Stand  against the continued humiliation by India and  Tamil Nadu.  Is it important that Sri Lanka Cricket team should play in Tamil Nadu ? Is it not possible for the pilgrims to Buddhagaya find another route of access  avoiding  Tamil Nadu or postpone pilgrimage to Buddhagaya  until such time as India realises its error and  improve its relations? 

Many Sri Lankans also  go to India for shopping, more often to by sarees ,  jewelry and accessories for weddings. Sri Lanka produces enough clothes and jewelry therefore it is not necessary to buy Indian Sarees, bangles and golden necklaces.  Sri Lankan’s are very extravagant  in wedding and spend lavishly more often competing with others.  We should  learn to have simple weddings making them  a private and a personal event. We cannot impose trade embargos but we could certainly curtail purchasing Indian goods.

Sri Lanka should stop importing Indian films, and Indian books and magazine.  The ordinary Indians should be made to feel the injustice being committed by Tamil Nadu, and Indian government against Sri Lanka.

Import of motor vehicles,  luxury goods, buses,  and railway carriages from India should be stopped.  India with its claim to leadership in Asian is still not civilised.  The behaviour of the Tamils of TamilNadu is  ample evidence of their uncivilized savagery , as it was manifested in the  assault of  Buddhist monks.  There should be a campaign against visiting India.  India should apologise for the assault of monks and pilgrims, and take action against those Tamilnadu criminals.

The images of the uncivilized savage Tamils  of Tamil Nadu beating Buddhist monks should be produced as posters and pasted on Bill boards all over Sri Lanka, for our people to know the savagery of the Tamils of Tamil Nadu and the hypocrisy of India.

The Government cannot  demand the closing down of Indian Embassy, but it could ask India to close down the Indian Consulates in the North and the South.

India’s relationship with Sri Lanka is arrogant.  In voting  for the US resolution against Sri Lanka, India has shown its  rank indifference in its  relation with Sri Lanka preferring the  thugs and bullies of the West. Indian delegate before voting against Sri Lanka,  could have avoided his  speech which only confirmed India’s hidden agenda.

It was reported that the “India’s envoy Dilip Sinha made a strongly worded statement on Sri Lanka, saying that it was imperative that Sri Lanka implemented the recommendations of the LLRC and moved forward in accordance with the 13th amendment to its constitution. “It is vital that Sri Lanka addresses issues like missing persons, detainees, and the return of private lands by military”, Sinha said, adding that the measures taken so far were unsatisfactory. And advised Sri Lanka, “it was India’s belief that the end of the conflict provided an unique opportunity to Sri Lanka for reconciliation and the opportunity needed to be grabbed.”

Not failing to display its utter hypocrisy  he shamelessly stated, “India is Sri Lanka’s closest neighbour and share thousands of years of relationship. We cannot be but untouched by what happens in Sri Lanka……and said  that, “.. India would continue to engage with the country.” That was not a message of friendship.

India had outwardly shown that it was a friendly neighbour, but  worked against Sri Lanka behind its back.  The terrorism in Sri Lanka was the making of India. It helped the terrorists in various ways  by training them within  India territory.  India came to the help of the terrorists when they were about to be defeated by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces in 1987. India refused  to sell arms and ammunitions to the Government of Sri Lanka, and even demanded that not to purchase arms from China.  India refused to provide  transport to Sri Lanka Armed Forces when they were sieged by the terrorists.  India  even sold to Sri Lanka a second hand radar system that failed to detect  the ramshackle terrorist planes.

Sri Lanka  had  kept close relations with India as it did not want  the Western countries playing a damaging role in Sri Lanka , as it is  understood  from the introduction to  C.A.Chandraprema’s book “ Gota’s War”.  It states  “ ….After India lost control of things in 1990 and stepped aside, the Western powers began playing a role in the Sri Lanka Conflict.” 

It also explains why the West has taken an anti-Sri Lanka stand ever since the end of terrorist war, going all out to stop its development and reconciliation efforts under the President Mahinda Rajapakse. 

“ Usually, foreign interventions would mean that a foreign country would be able to influence, guide or control events in the country subject to the intervention.  Yet in Sri Lanka, no foreign power ever held the reins in their hands.  No foreign power could switch things on or off in Sri Lanka as they pleased.  The epicentre of the conflict always remained  firmly in Sri Lanka.  All foreign powers who thought  they could manipulate  or even influence  things in Sri Lanka  were to realise that they were only handmaidens and not mistresses.  A recent Norwegian government commissioned report on their peace mediation efforts in Sri Lanka candidly admitted as such.”

Sri Lanka therefore suffers the consequence of its determined effort to eliminate the terrible terrorism without being distracted by the powerful West, and against India’s expansionist intentions.
India’s friendly relation with Sri Lanka began with the reign of King Asoka and ended thereafter.  Now it is time that Sri Lanka begins to assert itself.  It is important in the first instance to remove the 13 Amendment from the Constitution, which was a part of India’s plan  for  division and annexation of the north and East of Sri Lanka.  Secondly Sri Lanka should either ban TNA or file action against them for the breach of the Sri Lanka Constitution. TNA is a barrier against reconciliation of Communities.

India and its allies the USA and the West may repeat what it had been doing to  Cuba with trade embargos and sanctions.  Sri Lanka should be strong to stand against their manipulations.

Sri Lanka singled out for a US resolution against it, on lies , conjectures, suppositions, and imaginations.

UNO is becoming an irrelevant outdated  institution changing the original concept of  a world forum to avoid  aggression against a country by another  allowing them to meet amoung equals to settle disputed issues through healthy discussion, so that a simple political dispute will not lead  into a word war. 

The UNO the forum of Member States decided on contested issues that may have political consequences, in committees and then put them to the General Assembly for a vote.  It was therefore at the end the Member States who together as equals  who decided on a disputed issue.  No committee could on its own take a  decision without referring it to the General Assemble through its Executive Committee.

The UNO did not take any decision unilaterally on internal matters of a Sovereign Member State. Now the situation of the  UNO is being changed the more powerful Member State taking decisive decisions out side the UNO, and its Security council in Separate Committees and Commissions, without their decisions endorsed by the UN General Assembly.

UN Human Rights Council  has become a second UNO taking decisions  concerning  internal matters of a Member State with the representatives of only 47 Members States from a total of 194 UN Member Sates. 

The resolution against Sri Lanka  had been sponsored by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navineetham Pillay as it has been said in its introduction to the Council by the Permanent Delegate for USA Ms.Eileen Denahoe “The resolution relied upon the detailed report of the High Commissioner Navi Pillay….”

For the purpose of the resolution the UNHRC Navineetham Pillay had resorted to questionable documents and evidence, such as the report  of the Panel appointed by the Secretary General of the UNO Ban Ki Moon which was only to advice him on the back ground to the elimination of terrorists in Sri Lanka.  At the beginning it remained an unpublished “personal” document  to the Secretary General.

The Panel itself had failed to be completely convinced of its own findings and handled laboriously  the doubtful material, “The panel found that even two years after the end of the civil war there were no accurate, reliable figures for the number of civilian deaths during the final months of the civil war.This was caused by lack of accurate figures for the number of civilians and Tamil Tigers in the conflict area, and the number of who emerged from the conflict area; and the burial of dead bodies without deaths being registered.

A UN document estimated that 7,721 civilians were killed between August 2008 and 13 May 2009. The panel found that this figure was probably too low because it only included deaths recorded by UN observers whereas many deaths may not have been observed, and because the figures only go up to 13 May 2009 whereas the number of deaths would have increased sharply after this date to the intensifying of shelling. Many civilians were left where they died, their deaths never registered and their bodies never brought to hospital or buried. The panel concluded that the number of civilian deaths "could easily be several times" than in the UN document.”

This is the report on which the USA  found it “noble” to present a resolution against Sri Lanka .
That was not all, the UN HRCouncil in Geneva  was turned into a big circus during the 22^nd Session.  It allowed persons who have no connection to the UNSystem to provide  evidently false documents blatantly accusing Sri Lanka. They presented fake documents, photos and films produced by the infamous UK Channel  4- which  when there is no acceptable evidence does not hesitate to collect old photos and copy extracts from video to fit them into a video footage and present it as “true” evidence of atrocities committed by the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka.   The “gullible” and vengeance seekers jumped at them and granted permission for their  display during the sessions of the UN HRCouncil.

A photo of the presumed 12 year old son of the terrorist leader with marks on the body which looked like bullet marks without any sign of blood around the wounds, was    publicised  to coincide with the 22 session of the UNHRCouncil .  If it was a real photo of  an atrocity committed by the Sri Lanka 

Armed Forces, why was it produced just during the 22^nd Session of the UNHRCouncil ?  Why was it not produced before at the 19 session of the UNHRCouncil for instances ?

Then of course there were the NGOs and the Human rights Watch allowed to speak on the resolution.  Is this the normal  procedure UNO should follow in its forums to settle complaints against a Country and settle disputes according to its Charter ?

The US Resolution was a big farce, firstly because USA is  with bloodied hands of violation of human rights every where in the world  it had intervened to make political settlements. Secondly, the resolution it passed, with which it now  threatens Sri Lanka to implement it under threat of sanctions against Sri Lanka is not acceptable, as it was not passed with an overall majority of the delegates at the 22^nd Session of the UNHR Council.

There were only 25 out of 47 votes in favour of the US Resolution.  Of the 25 States  Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Spain, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Moldova, Romania, and Switzerland are all US allies of the EU its “yes men”. 

They do not go further than the face value of a USA’s hasty decisions, as it was when America declared war against Iraq for having “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, which they never found  but instead, killed millions of men, women and children and left Iraq ruined without even fresh water to drink. And now the poor Iraqis are left to live in utter misery.  USA has finished with Iraq and will not come back to reconstruct Iraq which they demolished into rubble.

The others who voted for the resolution of USA had their own reasons. India  for instance is still to be accused for its violation of human rights and atrocities committed against the population in Kashmir, and its continuing violation of  the human rights of the Dalits. Accusing Sri Lanka  and voting for the US resolution is to protect itself from a US resolution against its “black » deeds in Kashmir, more than giving into rabble rousers in the South.

Libya has a government setup by France , and America. Therefore Libya’s allegiance is for them as their puppet government.  Korea had been with America as a result of its division after World War II, and North became a Communist State.  South Korea has still not found an independent voice. Argentina , Brazil, Chile,  Costa Rica, Peru, and Guatemala, in South America are dependent on USA. Sierra Leone, Benin and Ivory Coast are  West African countries maintaining relations with America.  They are all those who backed the American resolution against Sri Lanka.

Japan abstained from voting, perhaps Japan is psychologically in fear of a another Nagasaki  and Hiroshima.  Therefore it would not go directly against the country that did the greatest damage to its people and the country.  But Japan nevertheless disapproved the US resolution against Sri Lanka without being a party to it and remained uncommitted. 

So was Malaysia with a 7 percent of an Indian population speaking Tamil is seeking to keep the Tamil voice silent by abstaining to support the US Resolution without directly voting for it or against it. On the other hand Angola, Botswana, Ethiopia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Burkina Faso also found its voice to show their disagreement with the US resolution by abstaining to vote.

But the Independent generous,  fearless states willing to stand up against injustice and hypocrisy : Congo, Ecuador, Indonesia, Maldives ,Mauritania, Pakistan , Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Philippines,  Thailand, Uganda, and Venezuela said  “No” to the most disruptive, inelegant US resolution against Sri Lanka, which once again confirms US State Departments deplorable attitude of disdain for the developing countries. 

In this we see India breaking away from its Asian Colleagues to stand with the to-day’s aggressor of developing Nations.  The Middle Eastern States have not failed to stand by us.  Even Uganda and Congo from Africa  supported us.  That really shows that the USA which now comes out with its usual threats of sanctions is not supported by free thinking  people of the world. 

It is a pity America wants to stand as the “Goliath” trying to dictate terms to the world which will surely finish by finding a “David” to challenge its might. Sri  Lanka can do with out  America.  When America got just, 25 votes to its most reactionary resolution, while  22 countries either by voting NO  by abstaining, or by not being present showed their disregard to America which tries to show it is clean when it is splattered with the blood of innocents all over.

America cannot be triumphant with having passed its resolution against Sri Lanka only with THREE votes more than those who said No, abstained from voting, or ignored the resolution all together.

The Back Ground to US Resolution against Sri Lanka.

It is a sad day for those who love Sri Lanka, and those progressive people who watch Sri Lanka’s evolution as a great country which has risen from ashes so to say to become the envy of some and a beacon of hope for others.

American State Department, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry or even President Barack Obama -they are really of no use to us the people of Sri Lanka.  They care little for the people,  be they Tamil, Sinhala or Muslim, their main interest  in Sri Lanka is to what extent they can make use of the Sri Lanka- the country in their plan of a political strategy.

 

The resolution USA got passed in the UNHRCouncil today is a display of its utter  hypocrisy.  USA has really nothing special that allows them to move  a resolution against Sri Lanka.  USA State Department therefore turned to Navaneetham Pillay the most controversial Commissioner of the UN Human Rights Council.  Most of the US Resolution against Sri Lanka contains Navaneetham Pillay’s earlier antagonist demands against Sri Lanka.

There is no secret that Navaneetham Pillay- a South African Tamil is backed by the anti-Sri Lanka Pro terrorist Tamil Diaspora, and she wants vengeance from Sri Lanka government  for the elimination of Tamils as much as the pro-terrorists Tamils of the Diaspora.

There is no point asking her to come to Sri Lanka, as any one  like her coming with a prejudiced mind against Sri Lanka will change nothing.  She had apparently sent a delegation  to make an evolution of Sri Lanka’s progress since the defeat of terrorism.  But that delegation had not been able to contribute anything  constructive for Navi Pillay to change her mind about Sri Lanka.  Instead of the findings of the delegation she had delved into the  report of the  Darusman Panel to include its findings in to the resolution prepared by the US State Department.

Who had the “big” idea of taking only the last phase of the Sri Lanka’s military operations against the terrorists for a probe into the killing of civilians  and call for accountability, leaving out the previous 27 years of continuous massacres, assassinations, bomb blasts , and killing by  human suicide bombs of the terrorists ?

These were all pre-planned , USA and its allies never expected  Sri Lanka Armed Forces to win in military operations  against the terrorists. They wanted terrorists “safe and sound” to form a separate Eelam State. 

They saw to it by first suggesting to Sri Lanka that the only solution against terrorism is a political solution, then they arranged  with Netherland as a mediator several rounds of peace negotiations with the representatives of the  Government,  and the terrorist. The Mediators with the support of the then Secretary of Defence Austin Fernanado  raised the status of the  terrorists to a Armed Force  with the representatives of the terrorists given military insignias such as Colonels, Captains  and Commissars. Political Wing Leaders, Sea Tiger Commanders etc.

The stage was thus set for the emergence of the terrorists into an Armed Force of a future Tamil Eelam State.  Unfortunately for the Western manipulators, the terrorist Talaivar  Prabhakaran was not ready for peace negotiations, as he wanted an  unconditional formation of an Eelam State.  Therefore, he deliberately  broke off the peace negotiations in order to wrench off forcibly  a territory for an Eelam State.

Then the West through Netherland as a Mediator drew up the CFA setting up terrorist controlled areas and government areas.  The terrorists used this “ CFA Plan” to develop  its military force, stock arms and ammunition , set up factories to make bombs, submarines, protective earth mounds, set up road blocks and train a platoon of Black Tigers specialising in suicide human bombs. 

The CFA barred the Sri Lanka armed forces from firing at the terrorists, on the other hand the terrorists set up claymore bombs, trained grenade lobbers, and snipers and carried out  massacres, bomb blasts, and assassinations and  took refuge in the terrorist controlled areas into which the police or the Sri Lanka Armed Forces could not enter in search of the miscreants.

But the terrorists sure of their superior military power provoked the Armed Forces which did not have even modern  guns to resists the terrorists.  It was in such a provocation that the terrorists closed the Sluice gates of Mavil Aru depriving about 60000 farmers of water and  making 2000 hectares of land uncultivable.  It was then that the Government deployed its Armed Forces to open the Sluice gates.  The terrorists attacked the Armed forces cutting their access to the gates.  The Armed Forces retaliated and that was the beginning of the determined military operations by the Sri Lanka Armed Forces to end terrorism which finally came to an end in May, 2009.

During the course of that strategic military operations the West kept on  harping on a political solution, hoping the Sri Lanka Armed Forces  will be defeated by the superior terrorist forces.  When they saw that at last the Sri Lanka Armed Forces had adopted appropriate military strategies, and saw that the defeat of  terrorism was imminent the West sent emissaries to Sri Lanka.   

David Miliband and Bernard Kouchner the Foreign Ministers of UK and France  met the President of Sri Lanka  and demanded him to agree to a Cease Fire.  The President and the Armed Forces  refused to  a cease fire at that stage,  and even refused an entry visa to the Swedish foreign Minister Carl Bildt.

An extract from a relevant report:  “ Sri Lanka- The New Great Game” in The Diplomat Blog  read, “….

As the conflict drew to a close in the first half of 2009, there were a spate of diplomatic incidents that reflected growing tensions between Sri Lanka and the West. Sri Lanka rejected Britain’s appointment of Des Browne as Special Envoy to Sri Lanka and declined entry to Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. In addition, a joint visit in April 2009 by British Foreign Secretary David Miliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner to secure a ceasefire led to a further souring of relations. Meanwhile, in April 2009, Sri Lanka’s application for a US$1.9 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund met with US resistance. ‘We have raised questions about the IMF loan at this time. We think it is not an appropriate time to consider that until there is a resolution of the conflict,’ said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time……”( http://thediplomat.com/2009/10/28/sri-lanka-the-new-great-game/)

Sri Lanka stood steadfast not  giving in to any “great power” and won the war eliminating the terrorists for good.  But antagonised the USA and the West in the attempt and its final victory over terrorism was not felicitated to by the USA and the West.

The USA and the West have still not given up their “plot” to  annex Sri Lanka in their plan for a USA political Strategy in the Indian Ocean against China, into which it has roped in India.  USA and the West still refuse to condemn the terrorists. They avoid being drawn into “condemn” the terrorists and call for an accountability for the disasters it caused  from those who contributed to terrorism in Sri Lanka such as the Terrorist Front Organisations of the Tamil Diaspora, and the Associations such as the Global Tamil Forum, Tamils for Justice and the Tamil National Alliance, so on.  That is the very reason why they have restricted their focus on the last phase of the military operations against Terrorism by the Sri Lanka Armed forces, to avoid  accusing the terrorists and call accountability from those who represent the terrorists now,  on available factual evidence against them.

This is the back ground to the US Resolution against Sri Lanka passed at the 22^nd Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to-day the 21 March, 2013.  In which not only India but also Japan had stabbed Sri Lanka in the back, despite presenting them with two elephants. !!!.