UN should help Lanka heal wounds

By Uditha KUMARASINGHE

Senior Minister for Human Resources D.E.W. Gunasekera said the Darusman panel appointed by the United Nations Secretary General has gone beyond its mandate. The Minister in an interview with the Sunday Observer said the mission of the Darusman panel was to be a fact-finding panel. But they have gone beyond their mandate and played the role of an investigative panel and further turned into a prosecuting panel by framing charges against Sri Lanka.

The Minister said having released the Darusman report to the media they are attempting to build up a world opinion against a small country like Sri Lanka which is very unfair. The Darusman report has hindered the reconciliation process and re-opened healing wounds by creating suspicion and fear among the minorities. Therefore the Government has been compelled to take counter measures on this propaganda campaign launched by them. What the UN should do at this post conflict phase is to help Sri Lanka to heal wounds rather than critical of it.

Q: The Darusman report has been released. How is Sri Lanka going to respond in countering its allegations?

A: As far as the Government is concerned, we don't consider this as a UN report or UN document. Now it has been released to the world. I think this is a thing which should not have been done. Because this report was not authored by the UN Secretary General. The Secretary General had earlier made a statement to the effect that after the report is reviewed, he will consider and take action. But prior to his review it was released to the media. The official position of the Government is that the report would not be responded to. But we will report on what we have done and on what really happened during the last phase of the conflict. That will explain our position.

If the Secretary General considers he may take it up with the UN Security Council or the Human Rights Council. We are getting ready to meet the challenges of the UN Security Council or the Human Rights Council.

Q: How do you view the credibility of the report?

A: This report is based on manufactured stories, rumours, imaginations and unsubstantiated evidence provided by NGOs and INGOs. External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris told Parliament the panel had taken up the position that the authors of the evidence will not be revealed for another 20 odd years. Even in a court of law when an allegation is made that has to be substantiated by either oral or written evidence. Here, they are going to conceal the origin of the evidence. Our position is that they are based on merely concocted manufactured stories and information which had been floating in the media during the last phase of the conflict. Even the Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe in his statement made in Parliament on Tuesday said the global electronic media and the social media networks namely the Facebook and all the rest of it have become very powerful today. Even the relations between the Governments and talks between the Foreign Ministers are not sufficient. We have to respond to the allegations raised by the media as well. My question is who owns this media? Who controls the media? Who cooked up the stories for the media? We know the entire global network is owned by a few companies and individuals. The most powerful CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera are the main global networks. There is monopoly of news dissemination. That is very effective. There is no doubt. But that is the very reason why we have to mobilise our people. At May Day, we had a massive gathering, but we don't have such a powerful media to disseminate our information throughout the world. So we depend on the strength of our people.

Q: The report refers to 'sources' which they don't want to divulge?

A: They say they don't divulge the sources for next 20 years. They say it is confidential. That means their sources are unsubstantiated. The in-depth case is that if an allegation is made in a court of law or international court, it has to be substantiated with either oral or written evidence which this Darusman panel prefers not to reveal. It is not a charge against an individual. It is a charge against a sovereign country. We are a responsible member of the United Nations. At the inception, the Secretary General took up the position that he wants to get advice. But the panel appointed by him has acted and gone beyond its mandate. They turned out to be a fact-finding panel. But more than that they have turned into an investigative panel and further they have converted into a prosecuting panel by framing charges as well. Probably what the Secretary General expected in good faith from these competent people was to get some advice on what he should do. But they have gone to the extent of collecting facts, investigating them and framing charges by reaching a conclusion as well.

They have also become judges. Having released the Darusman report to the media means, they are canvassing for it. They are attempting to build up a world opinion against a small country like Sri Lanka. That is very unfair.

Q: Wounds are healed at the post conflict phase. Does not the Darusman report complicate the national reconciliation process?

A: As far as we are concerned, that is the most vital aspect of this report. These are grave charges framed against a sovereign country by an unauthorised external panel that does not deserve to be even entertained by an authoritative body like the UN. It has contributed to the escalation of tension in the country and in the region. It has hindered the reconciliation process and again it has re-opened the healing wounds by creating suspicion and fear among the minorities. They are setting Tamil people against Sinhalese and vice versa. I think this is the biggest damage done by this panel.

Q: There are allegations on the credentials of the panel members. Would you like to comment on this?

A: I also read from the press. They are people who are acknowledged and some say they are pro-LTTE. Whatever it is, they have looked at this whole question with coloured glasses. Of the three panel members, one has already written a book on the Sri Lankan conflict. So he has preconceived notions. The panel member from Africa belongs to an INGO. The third person is the former Attorney General of Indonesia. He was one of the top officials of Suhartho's dictatorial Government that massacred millions of people. These are their credentials.

We are not worried about their credentials as the Secretary General has reposed confidence in them. Whatever the report that would have come to his hands, he would have reviewed it. Only now he says that he is going to review it.

Having released the report to the press, the whole world opinion on this report has already been set in motion.

They have already created world opinion against Sri Lanka. Therefore a small country like us, we are compelled to take counter measures on this propaganda. That is what we are doing at the moment.

Q: Should we not muster a worldwide campaign to justify Sri Lanka's stand on this issue?

A: At the moment we are getting ready for it by collecting information. The External Affairs Ministry is working on it. We have already taken a number of measures in this regard. Our External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L.Peiris will meet the counterparts particularly the members of the Security Council and the Human Rights Council. We are sending various delegations to the respective countries at various levels. We are also making our position clear through the international media.

A new situation has arisen after the killing of Osama Bin Laden. As a result, things have completely turned upside down. It is my view that the arguments against Sri Lanka through the Darusman panel with the charges of war crimes, violation of human rights and international laws should be torn to shreds and dumped in the Arabian sea. They say Osama's body was taken by the USS Carl Vinson ship and dumped in the Arabian Sea. So the whole arguments have been taken and dumped in the Arabian Sea. Therefore this event has completely exonerated us.

Q: Has not the Government's rehabilitation and reconstruction program helped the Tamil community to live without fear today? Has not the international community ignored this?

A: I don't put the blame on the international community. When we met the Japanese Government and various other representatives, they fully appreciated our reconstruction process. Even the US representatives have appreciated it. It is only this Darusman panel which has ignored this. I think they would have taken these facts and figures into their account. If we compare, the killing of Osama and Prabhakaran, there is a case that the Head of a foreign Government says he gave the order to kill Osama Bin Laden. Whether Osama is terrorist or not is a different matter. Because this entire argument is centred on human rights. Even during a war, there is a way of killing terrorists. Otherwise somebody can highlight it as a violation of fundamental rights and international law. But here a foreign Head of State gives an order to kill a person who is a citizen of Saudi Arabia who had hidden in another country - Pakistan without the knowledge of both Heads of the States. Is it not violation of international law? The United States itself has said that Osama was unarmed and he was with the civilians at the time of his killing. A number of civilians have also been killed due to the result of this incident. Is it not a violation of human rights and international law?

In our case there was a war against terrorists. LTTE Leader Prabhakaran died during the final stages of the war. No one knew it until his body was recovered. At the last phase of the conflict, there were about 300,000 civilian used as a human shield by the terrorists. The Sri Lankan Government gave direct orders to the Armed Forces not to harm any civilians. The Western powers use the term collateral damage. So they should be excused. But in our case when there were 300,000 civilians and fighting against the most ruthless terrorist organisation, they say that collateral damage is not taken into account. It applies only to the Western countries. In our case, we have secured the lives of 300,000 people including the father and mother of Prabhakaran. The parents of Prabhakaran were taken on the shoulders of our soldiers. In which country can we find such things?

Q: Why has not world attention been drawn to the spate of killings, bombings and grave human rights violations taking place in several parts of the globe?

A: Simultaneously a lot of incidents are happening in the world now. For instance what is happening in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Tunisia, Libya and other countries. So many civilians have been killed in Bahrain when they protested against the Government. Neither the United Nations nor the Human Rights Council nor any Western Heads of States raised objections. But as far as our country is concerned, the motive behind their entire political position is that they have some other agenda. That is my position. This may not be the position of the Government. But my own position is that they have a political agenda and they are acting on it. That is to take the geographical interest of Sri Lanka. The global strategies of the respective Governments, they look at questions from that perspective. They are dictated by these global strategies as well as geographical interest and look at the whole question.

They know that Asia is leading the world economy. All the countries in Asia are securing an unprecedented growth. After 500 years, Asia has started leading the world economy. So the Western powers are disturbed and their economies are running into crises. At present, the neoliberalism is in crisis and they are unable to recover. According to economists, it will take another two years to recover. In spite of the war against terrorists, we as a small nation have also registered a considerable economic growth. Even during the period of the fourth Eelam war in 2006, we registered a 6.8 percent growth. During the year of the world economic recession, we registered 3.5 percent growth when the developed countries registered a minus growth. We have achieved 8.2 percent growth last year. In spite of the financial crisis, energy crisis and food crisis, we have registered unprecedented growth in the post independence era. Through this panel report, their main aim is to destabilise our country and create divisions among our communities.

Q: Don't you think that the small developing countries receive step- motherly treatment at the UN?

A: The UN structure is that. But I feel there is a balance of forces in the world. After beginning with the 21 century, things have started to change. Now the balance of forces is changing. At present no one talks about G8, they talk about G20. That clearly shows the world balance of forces is changing. The world order is also changing. The Asian continent has come forward as a leading economy. These are some of the global factors and this will get reflected at the United Nations. They have been using the United Nations to their own ends. Otherwise they would have used the UN against us. In the case of Afghanistan, they got a resolution passed and walked into Afghanistan. Even in the case of Libya, they pushed a resolution. But some of the major powers abstained. But they walked into Libya. In our case, immediately after end of the conflict, they tried it at the Security Council and the Human Rights Council. But they failed. It was not only China and Russia, a number of other third world countries stood with us. As a result, the Western powers could not do that. As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, they knew the world reality. Therefore they thought of taking some other indirect way of influencing our country. That is why they appointed a panel. Through that panel, they prepared a manufactured report and created a world opinion to come back here.

Q: Rather than being critical of Sri Lanka, should not the Darusman report have helped a UN member state by offering its expertise to heal wounds?

A: That is what should be done. That is the role of the UN. The UN is not expected to create tension in the world. What they should have done was to help Sri Lanka heal. At the last phase of the war, they tried to intervene and stop the war against terrorism. They tried to mediate and even explored the possibility of sending UN forces to Sri Lanka which President Mahinda Rajapaksa firmly rejected. The President did not succumb to their pressure. That is why we were able to put an end to terrorism. They also tried to rescue Prabhakaran and other LTTE leaders. But they failed to do so. That is why the Darusman report started by saying that the war ended tragically. As far as the people of Sri Lanka are concerned, the war did not end tragically. It may be tragic to the terrorists but not to the peace-loving people of Sri Lanka. How can they argue when they say both Osama and Prabhakaran are terrorists? Even the US Assistant Secretary of State Robert O'Blake has mentioned the fact that both were terrorists and they were almost equals.

In their case they killed only a terrorist leader, but the entire structure remains intact. In our case the whole LTTE structure was destroyed. It is only the diaspora who are trying to put all these manoeuvres at present.