How did the perception of "threatening" emerge?

By Dushy Ranetunge

A telephone conversation between the Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the Editor of the Daily Mirror Champika Liyanarachchi has engulfed the corridors of power quite unnecessarily and unproductively this week.

The contents of the conversation are not disputed by either party, but its interpretation is. First of all there were three conversations originating from three telephone calls.

The first telephone call originated from the Defence Secretary to the Editor of the Daily Mirror and during the conversation the line got cut off due to Colombo's mobile network glitches. The Editor then telephoned the Defence Secretary and again during the conversation the call got cut off and another call was made by the editor to the Defence Secretary.

The Editor of the Daily Mirror is known to the Defence Secretary and their relationship could be described as being friendly as the Editor has even had dinner at the Defence Secretary's home with his family.

In this context the controversial telephone conversation cannot be described as being hostile, as inaccurately being portrayed by some reports of the incident.

There are some doubts if the Editor of the Daily Mirror regarded the conversation as being hostile or threatening at the point when the conversation ended. There is speculation that the perception of "threatening" may have emerged later after the contents of the conversation were discussed by the Editor with her colleagues.

If someone is threatening you, do you call the person back twice to be threatened some more?

A clinical analysis of the conversation using a western mindset, ignoring the emotions of the characters involved and the background information available would lead one to conclude that the defense secretary was indeed threatening the Editor of the Daily Mirror by alerting her to the dangers of being critical of the Karuna faction.

At worst it portrays a perception that a powerful government official heading the state's war machine is threatening Sri Lanka's first female editor of an independent newspaper of physical harm if she publishes articles critical of the Karuna group.

There are some ground realities that need to be considered in trying to understand the incident. The state's control of the Karuna faction cannot be described as being 100%. The murders of Raviraj MP and Joseph Pararajasingham MP are issues of great embarrassment to the Sri Lankan state and the finger in both these cases point to operatives of the Karuna faction.

While the state would prefer to have the Karuna group (TMVP) as a legitimate democratic political group, ground realities tend to be quite different. Both the LTTE and the Karuna group are ruthless groups who will go to any length to achieve their respective goals. For example, if the LTTE believes that by targeting the Editor of the Daily Mirror at this stage it could implicate the Sri Lankan state or the Karuna group and gain some political and international mileage, it will not hesitate to do so.

Both the LTTE and the Karuna group have gone to great lengths to ensure that newspapers and articles hostile and critical of their respective organisations are disrupted.

The Sri Lankan state and the international community are engaged in complex strategies to tame these undemocratic violent groups and encourage and in some instances force them into a democratic framework.

Another important piece of background information which needs to be considered is that although Champika Liyanarachchi is the Editor of the Daily Mirror, she is not necessarily in a position to publish articles of her choice and does not have 100% editorial freedom.

The freedom of the press that many are ranting about in Sri Lanka is not primarily the freedom of expression of the journalists or the editors, but in particular their masters who own these establishments and have agendas of their own.

In this context one must not discount the political motives of powerful forces who wish to derail the Gotabaya Rajapaksa/Sarath Fonseka military initiative, exploiting incidents such as these to their advantage.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa's patriotism and his somewhat emotional commitment to the current military initiative add another complex dimension of its own.

There are other opposition political considerations which have set in place a motion of events to try to discredit and remove General Sarath Fonseka, some time ago, and in failing to do so, are now targeting Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Both have also been subject to LTTE suicide attacks.Both these individuals will be cautious about future interactions with editors.

The British High Commissioner's involvement in this whole issue is of concern. It is reported that he was showing solidarity with the Editor of the Daily Mirror. This is confusing and raises questions as to his conduct.

When the BBC was under severe pressure from the British Government, with a senior British Defence Ministry official who leaked information to the BBC committing suicide and the British Government displeased with the critical coverage of the BBC with regards to the Iraqi war, what would have been the position of the Foreign and Commonwealth offices if the Sri Lankan High Commissioner to London, visited the embattled BBC reporter in question and the BBC to show solidarity and concern?