Army seminar confounds critics - Prof. Rohan Gunaratna

by Shanika Sriyananda

International Counter terrorism expert Prof. Rohan Gunaratna said whether the allegations of war crimes levelled against Sri Lanka during the final stages of the humanitarian operations in May 2009, were true or not, the Sri Lankan government must investigate and respond to all allegations.

“As a stated policy the Sri Lankan military did not target civilians, but it is very likely that there were individual and isolated cases.

I have not come across any war devoid of such killings and torture. In the US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Gharib, Bagram and several CIA black sites as well as in other facilities in Egypt and elsewhere, terrorist suspects and convicts faced torture, contract torture and death”, he said.

In an interview with the Sunday Observer, Prof. Gunaratna, who was in Sri Lanka attending the international seminar on ‘Defeating Terrorism: Sri Lankan Experience’, said the most important lesson the international military experts learned from Sri Lanka’s experience was that ‘terrorism and insurgency can be defeated’.

He also said it was paramount for Sri Lanka also to respond to the controversial Darusman Report to address each and every allegation comprehensively.

Prof. Gunaratna, the Head of the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research and Professor of Security Studies at the S.

Rajaratnam School of International Studies at the Nanyang Technology University, Singapore who was a keynote speaker at the seminar said although no professional soldier should engage in atrocities, such extrajudicial killings have taken place in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Chechnya and in China.

“As such, it is essential that the world addresses these issues collectively. Rather than single out Sri Lanka or any other country, there must be an investigation on such allegations globally from Egypt to Kashmir and Iraq to Afghanistan”, he said.

Commenting on Human Rights Watch’s call to boycott the seminar, he said that if there was a plan either by a government or an NGO to boycott the Army seminar, it did not succeed.

“Among the distinguished participants from the West included Dr. David Kilcullen, one of the world’s foremost counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism specialists’, he said.

Excerpts:

Q: It was said that the seminar would be a fine platform to showcase Lankan military experience. How do you see the success of the seminar?

A: The Sri Lanka Army seminar “Defeating Terrorism: The Sri Lanka Experience” was an immense success.

Having defeated the first insurgency and terrorist campaign of the 21st century, the Sri Lanka Army organised a world-class seminar.

There was full disclosure of the grand strategy, operations, procedures, tactics and techniques that were used.

Furthermore, the Army has publicised all their presentations on the web for a full review by interested parties and for the record for posterity.

The most important lesson was that terrorism and insurgency could be defeated.

The Sri Lankan Army shared with the international community how an insurgent and a terrorist group as ruthless, cunning and deceptive as the LTTE could be defeated.

This included nations struggling in Asia, Africa the Middle East and Latin America where 95 per cent of the conflicts are located as well as the West, where its Armies had not done too well recently.

The friendly relations between the speakers and the participants prompted Sri Lanka to offer training and support.

To maintain the continuity of its expertise and share its invaluable experience with partner nations, Sri Lanka is likely to build a Centre of Excellence in Homeland Security (CEHS) in the coming year.

Q: You were a key speaker at the seminar. Do you think that it facilitated to answer the war crime allegations against Sri Lanka?

A: The Army seminar was the first meaningful step taken to counter such allegations by human rights and other activists lobbied by the LTTE front and the cover and sympathetic organisations.

It was only the beginning of creating a capability to engage the NGOs, step by step especially the advocacy NGOs and politicians lobbied by the LTTE.

The last two years were exploited by the LTTE to create a vicious narrative and influence a few but important human rights groups and co-opt Western politicians susceptible to constituency and electoral pressure.

In turn, they influenced a narrow segment of the international community. I wish that the Sri Lanka Army did not wait for two long years to share the ground reality of the battlefield. But the wheels of government turn very slowly.

With LTTE activities shifting from the domestic to the international arena, the Sri Lanka Army should have created an Army Information Service (AIS) to counter the false allegations and to publicise the massive humanitarian projects undertaken by the military personnel.

In the past, the Sri Lanka Army neglected Information Operations (IO) and the US trained Sri Lankan IO personnel were sent to the battlefield.

Like all other armies engaged in fighting, they must have information operations capabilities to counter false allegations and share the truth.

Q: The Human Rights Watch (HRW) claimed that the seminar was a cover-up for the war crime allegations. What is your comment?

A: No. On the contrary, the Army Seminar was - to quote a General leading a foreign delegation - a free, candid and an open discussion.

Furthermore, all the proceedings - both presentations and Q and A - are on the web, open for international scrutiny.

It is possible that HRW perceived prior to the seminar that the Sri Lanka Army wanted to hide some phases of the operations such as the final phase.

However, the formation commanders who conducted the battle personally presented and were examined by an international audience through question and answer.

The only question that was subjudice and not answered by General Shavendra Silva was answered by Colonel Larry Smith, the respected defence attache at the US Embassy since June 2008.

Although the US government said it was his personal view, Colonel Smith said, “Regarding the various versions of events that came out in the final hours and days of the conflict from what I was privileged to hear and to see, the offers to surrender that I am aware of seemed to come from the mouthpieces of the LTTE Nadesan, KP people who weren’t and never had really demonstrated any control over the leadership or the combat power of the LTTE.

So their offers were a bit suspect anyway, and they tended to vary in content hour by hour, day by day.

I think we need to examine the credibility of those offers before we leap to conclusions that such offers were in fact real.

And I think the same is true for the version of events.

It’s not so uncommon in combat operations, in the fog of war, as we all get our reports second, third and fourth hand from various Commanders at various levels that the stories don’t seem to all quite match up.

But I can say that the version presented here so far in this is what I heard as I was here during that time. And I think I better leave it at that before I get into trouble.”

Q: The HRW urged the world community to boycott the seminar and said that the main western nations avoided the seminar. How do you see this claim?

A: The US Defence Attache Col. Larry Smith’s candid answer also reflected the political nature of human rights where Western nations and West-funded NGOs use human rights as a political weapon.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, one million civilians died. But the international NGOs focused on the deaths in Chechnya in Russia and Xingjiang in China.

Unlike Russia and China, Sri Lanka cannot afford to ignore criticism irrespective of how unfair or false they may be.

Both HRW and other advocacy NGOs should be invited by the Sri Lankan government to discuss these allegations.

At this time, these NGOs have been heavily lobbied by LTTE front, cover and sympathetic groups.

Furthermore, the Sri Lankan External Affairs Ministry should create an NGO Advocacy Division, at least, a Unit, to prevent international rights groups only receiving the LTTE version of events.

If there was a plan either by a government or a NGO to boycott the Army Seminar, it did not succeed.

Among the distinguished participants from the West included Dr. David Kilcullen, one of the world’s foremost counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism specialists.

The counter-insurgency advisor to the then American Secretary of State Rice, Dr. Kilcullen is considered the most influential counter insurgency advisor to General Petreaus, the US Commander in Afghanistan.

Governments want to learn from the successes and the failures of the Sri Lankan campaign - I do not think anyone can or anyone should stop the process of learning!

Terrorists are the worst human rights violators. Most security forces worldwide react to terrorism and insurgency.

No professional soldier will intentionally target or deliberately kill civilians. For instance, the US military intervened in Afghanistan after Al Qaeda used Taliban sanctuary in Afghanistan to strike the US mainland.

The Sri Lankan military too responded to terrorist attacks.

As a result of collateral damage, civilians died, but there was no intentional military operations aimed at killing civilians.

In my view, Sri Lankan government together with other governments challenged by insurgencies and terrorist campaigns should convene a Summit for NGOs especially for advocacy NGOs such as HRW and discuss these contentious issues.

Q: You mentioned about over 1,400 deaths due to co-lateral damage. How do you prove it since the Army chief says that there is no authentic verification to clarify the number of civilian deaths during the final stages of the battle?

A: Civilian fatalities and casualties are inevitable in counter-terrorist and counter-insurgency campaigns. I do not know of any war in the word where civilians have not suffered death, maiming or injury. The Sri Lankan war was not an exception.

To prevent misinterpretation of events, the Sri Lankan government must complete the census it belatedly initiated to identify both the LTTE and civilian deaths. This is exceptionally difficult because the LTTE was notorious for exploiting civilians both to staff the FDLs and to support its fighters.

Nonetheless, this is an exercise that will set the record straight.

To prevent the LTTE cooking figures of dead civilians and caution genuine NGOs from using them, the Sri Lankan government now has a responsibility to collect, collate, and compute the number of civilian and LTTE deaths.

As stated in the army operational orders at the very top, as a policy the Sri Lankan army advocated a zero tolerance casualty approach. However, the reality of war in every country deviates from that ideal.

For instance, between Dec. 4 and 7, 2001, B-52 bombers dropped 700,000 pounds, including 15,000-pound Daisy Cutters in Afghanistan to kill al Qaeda, Taliban and other terrorists resulting in civilian deaths.

On May 2, 2011, the US reported that when the US navy SEALS intervened to target Osama bin Laden, an al Qaeda terrorist held a woman as a human shield and the US operator opened fire killing both the terrorists and the woman.

It would have been better had Sri Lanka issued a White Paper immediately after defeating the LTTE.

The LTTE front, cover and sympathetic groups exaggerated the civilian losses, distorted the developments on the ground, and created its version of events.

Although the Army Seminar explained the sequence of events in the last No Fire Zone where the LTTE moved its guns and held the civilian population hostage as well as state response, the government must now produce a comprehensive paper on what happened on the ground.

Otherwise, there will be a gap between truth and perception and that will be exploited by the LTTE and parties with vested interests.

Q: The Channel 4 video has been screened at the UN sessions and they had again urged a full scale investigation into the video. According to your view is there a need to commence an investigation by the government?

A: Yes, whether they are true or not, the Sri Lankan government must investigate and respond to all allegations.

As a Stated Policy the Sri Lankan military did not target civilians, but it is very likely that there were individual and isolated cases.

I have not come across any war devoid of such killings and torture.

In the US detention centres in Guantanamo Bay, Abu Gharib, Bagram and several CIA black sites as well as in other facilities in Egypt and elsewhere, terrorist suspects and convicts faced torture, contract torture and death.

In all armies there are soldiers who take the law onto their hands.

Although no professional soldier should engage in atrocities, such extrajudicial killings have taken place in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Chechnya and in China.

As such, it is essential that the world address these issues collectively. Rather than single out Sri Lanka or any other country, there must be an investigation into such allegations globally from Egypt to Kashmir and Iraq to Afghanistan.

Q:It is reported that the UN Secretary General Ban-ki-Moon is still waiting for Sri Lanka’s reply. Do you think that Sri Lanka should reply ?

A: Yes, it is paramount for Sri Lanka to respond to the controversial Darusman Report. Each and every allegation must be addressed comprehensively.

Without the UN Security Council or the UN General Assembly, the UN Secretary General had no mandate to commission a panel report on Sri Lanka.

As two wrongs do not make a right, my own advice to the Sri Lankan government was to invite the panellists to Sri Lanka.

As the panellists had no understanding of the Sri Lankan conflict, it was very clear from the onset that they will produce a document that will be influenced deeply by LTTE propaganda.

The UN panel report cited from LTTE front organisations such as the Tamil Rehabilitation Organisation and from other tainted sources of information.

While the UN is concerned about North Korea’s role, it is ironic that a panel commissioned by the UN Secretary General is relying on reporting by the TRO that raised and channelled millions of dollars to procure from North Korea arms, ammunition and explosives to kill, maim and injure civilians.

As such a panel report can affect the reputation, image and the prestige of the Sri Lankan security forces, the government and the country, I was keen that the Sri Lankan government invite the Darusman panel to visit the North and the East.

I was keen for them to hear, see, learn and understand first hand about the Sri Lankan conflict, without making judgements based on a one-sided view and rushing into conclusions.

For instance, the report states that 40,000 civilians died in the NFZ.

The round number is a direct excerpt from LTTE propaganda.

If the Darusman Panel wanted their report to be taken seriously, they should have come up with a list of 40,000 civilian names that could be verified.

The Sri Lankan government must learn from what happened - they must develop a policy and a practice to engage everyone including those who are misled or do not mean well for Sri Lanka.

Instead of contributing to peace and stability that has been achieved at great cost, the Darusman panel report has created the environment for the revival of the LTTE remnants.

The fallout from the LTTE forced recruitment in Sri Lanka and coercion of the diaspora for funds, the LTTE was rejected after its defeat in May 2009.

The Tamils in Sri Lanka and overseas started to distance itself from the LTTE and started to participate in the development projects in the north and the east, when the Darusman report was released on the eve of the Sinhala and Hindu New Year.

The activities of the LTTE factions overseas that had taken a back seat in late 2009 and 2010, revived after the release of the Darusman report.

After the LTTE was dismantled in Sri Lanka, the Darusman report was the best gift one could give a dying LTTE!

Q: You mentioned that Sri Lanka would not win the battle if India refused to support the government. Why and how important for the government to maintain good relations with India in future?

A: Over geopolitical and geostrategic differences, India armed, trained, financed and directed over 20,000 terrorists from its soil from 1983 August to 1987 July.

Both India and Sri Lanka paid a heavy price for not understanding each other. Sri Lanka must be sensitive to India’s geopolitical concerns.

While Sri Lanka should maintain its economic friendship with China, Sri Lanka must maintain a very close political relationship with New Delhi and with Tamil Nadu.

Although Tamil Nadu politicians are corrupt and its politics cheap, Sri Lanka must strive to build a strategic partnership both with Indian Tamil politicians and officials and invite them to visit Sri Lanka. Tamil Nadu is as vital as New Delhi.

Sri Lanka will return to violence only under two conditions.

First, India’s security and intelligence services will start to tolerate the build up in Tamil Nadu of LTTE cells.

Second, Western countries will turn a blind eye to the activities of LTTE second and third tier leaders living on their soil and politicizing, radicalizing and mobilizing another generation of youth.

With Sino-Lankan ties growing, it is paramount for Sri Lankan leaders to recognize that both these may be happening at this point.

Q: The need for a well-established information strategy to highlight Lankan’s success stories internationally was highlighted at the seminar. Do you think Sri Lanka is at a disadvantage due to lack of such a system?

A: Today, Sri Lanka is challenged by a segment of Western nations not because it did something wrong but because it failed to develop an information and a public relations strategy.

Even today, most Sri Lankan leaders do not understand that information is a force multiplier. Sri Lanka needs to address this issue seriously.