|
|
|
| Sunday, 19 March 2006 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Mangala's speech at IISS, London : Liberal asylum regimes - biggest loophole
Excerpts of the remarks by Mangala Samaraweera, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Sri Lanka at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), London on March 14, 2006. “I am pleased to be here today at this premier Strategic Studies Forum to share with you our perspectives in dealing with terrorism in its national and international dimensions. My late predecessor Lakshman Kadirgamar, held your research work in high esteem and was keen that a similar institution be established in Sri Lanka. I do share his vision and plan to accomplish that mission. During a visit to the United Kingdom in 2004, Minister Kadirgamar held discussions with the Director of Studies and Research Fellow for South Asia of the IISS with a view to working together in building and shaping a new Institute of Strategic Studies in Sri Lanka. There has been a long-felt need for such an institution in Sri Lanka, a country that has suffered the scourge of terrorism for nearly three decades. Minister Kadirgamar's efforts resulted in a four-member delegation, including Alex Nicoll, IISS Director of Defence Analysis who is presiding over this lecture today, visiting Sri Lanka to study and advise on the setting up of a Strategic Studies Institute. President Mahinda Rajapakse and his Cabinet have already given approval to this project and work is well in progress to set up the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of Strategic Studies, through an act of Parliament. "Before speaking about the challenges in dealing with terrorism, one must ask, what is terrorism? The British Government defines terrorism as, "the use or threat of force, for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause, which involves serious violence against any person or property". The US Defense Department defines it as, "the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear, intended to coerce or intimidate government or society as to the pursuit of goals". The UN Secretary General Kofi Annan describes terrorism principally in line with the legal norms enshrined in the UN Conventions on this subject. The devastation effects of terrorism and the complexity of its causes that manifest in different situations around the world seem to have given rise to this repertoire of nuances. Jessica Stern's description in her book, "One Ultimate Terrorist" appears to capture most, if not all of these elements: Hundreds of definitions of terrorism are offered in literature. Some focus on the perpetrators, others on their purposes, and still others on their techniques... only two characteristics are critical for distinguishing terrorism from other forms of violence. First, terrorism is aimed at noncombatants. This is what makes it different from fighting a war. Second, terrorists use violence for a dramatic purpose: usually to instill fear in the targeted population. This deliberate evocation of dread is what sets terrorism apart from simple murder or assault.' No matter how we define it, the three decade long violent activities of the LTTE in Sri Lanka fit within every definition of terrorism as understood by the civilized world. This armed group has the dubious distinction of pioneering the lethal art of suicide attacks against civilian and other targets and instilling a suicide culture in child soldiers. "In the innocent days of pre-nine-eleven, the world tended to view certain terrorist organisations with a somewhat tolerant eye. Dispensers of terror were viewed at times as rebels or even "freedom fighters" and as long as their operatives did not wreak havoc on their own doorsteps, some counties were at times not too concerned about allowing terror organisations to open up offices, front organisations and lobbying groups inside their borders. Current roles "Liberal asylum regimes, as well as covert safe havens, genuine human rights problems as well as orchestrated human rights propaganda, Diaspora dynamics as well as illicit fund raising and arms trafficking, have all enabled ruthless but efficient terror groups to develop powerful and lucrative external linkages not only to sustain themselves but also to blur the line between the so-called 'armed struggles' and brazen terrorism. These terror organisations have carefully but consistently developed super efficient illegal infrastructures in a large number of international activities that drive the forces of globalisation. These terrorist infrastructures now work quite seamlessly in sectors such as merchant shipping, aviation, international money transfers, illegal banking,illicit trafficking of arms and people, satellite communication, ICT activities and a host of other areas. This complex web of non-state infrastructure has enabled terror groups to talk peace and conflict resolution abroad while waging war and suppressing democracy at home. We are now witnessing and experiencing the globalisation of terrorism. This kind of terrorism infrastructure anywhere can be a threat to peace making and democracy everywhere. The current peace making models, whether home grown or externally assisted or facilitated, do not effectively or even adequately address this international dimension of the peace making challenge, The Sri Lanka peace process is no exception. The current models of peace making and facilitation tend to have intense focus on domestic root causes and domestic behaviours of parties while the facilitation has only a loose focus or no focus at all on the international root causes. The well-oiled propaganda machinery or the LTTE, has unsuccessfully attempted to portray themselves as a "liberation" movement fighting for the emancipation of the Tamil people. However, the reality is something completely different from the propaganda. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
