Cameron shows undue interest in Lanka's domestic affairs
British Prime Minister David Cameron has given priority to Sri
Lanka's internal matters than burning issues of Briton. Going by the
manner in which he shows undue interest regarding Sri Lanka's domestic
matters, one wonders whether he has forgotten whether he is the Prime
Minister of Britain or Sri Lanka.
Cameron has welcomed the decision of the UNHRC to initiate its own
independent investigation into alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka. “I am
pleased that the UN Human Rights Council has agreed to press ahead with
its own independent investigation. This is a victory for the people of
Sri Lanka,” he was quoted as saying.
Cameron should feel ashamed of making such a controversial statement
as no Sri Lankan would agree with his laughable logic. If Cameron is so
concerned about human rights, what he should have done first and
foremost was to bring a resolution against his own country for the human
rights violations of British forces when they invaded Sri Lanka,
mercilessly killing thousands of our people.
A protest against western interference in domestic affiars,
opposite the British Embassy in Colombo
Shameless Cameron goes on to say that he is proud of the “crucial
role that Britain has played to secure this outcome” -- the passing of
the UNHRC Resolution against Sri Lanka. He could feel even more proud of
if he could bring another Resolution against Great Britain for their war
crimes in Sri Lanka. Briton should hold a credible investigation to
those crimes against humanity, if not Cameron could well bring a
Resolution against the UK at the next UNHRC sessions.
We could understand Cameron's crocodile tears if he demands the same
course of action against his own country. Cameron talks about values but
it was the British who invaded countries such as Sri Lanka in the 1800s,
killing thousands of people in those countries. Once they gained control
of those countries and made them British colonies, they had robbed all
the wealth of these countries.
It is the leader of a country which has such a notorious track record
that has come forward to pontificate us on values and importance of
human rights. Cameron need not shed crocodile tears over Sri Lanka as
our own leaders had already brought victory for the people by defeating
terrorism under the illustrious political leadership of President
Before poking his finger into the domestic matters of Sri Lanka,
Cameron should address the burning issues in his country and bring
victory for the Britons rather than showing extraordinary concern for
We are fortunate to have a fearless political leader such as
President Rajapaksa who has worked tirelessly for people, putting
country before self. Be it Cameron or any other world leader, no
foreigner could feel for people of Sri Lanka more than our leaders.
If foreigners such as Cameron and his allies feign such concern, all
those moves are being hatched with ulterior moves to rob Sri Lanka's
They are only talk about the final phase of the battle against
terrorism, especially last 3-4 months. If the Western leaders are so
worried about human rights violations of all Sri Lankans, they should
call for a full investigation of the entire period from 1983 to 2009.
Calling only for a few months of that long period will not do any
justice for thousands of people who had suffered due to terrorism. The
leaders in the West yearn to see smaller countries such as Sri Lanka
battling with never-ending problems as such conflicts would give them an
opportunity to pork their fingers to domestic affairs of these countries
and reign supreme.
It is no secret how the powerful Western nations such as the US and
UK had exerted tremendous pressure on UNHRC member countries to grab
their votes in favour of the Resolution against Sri Lanka.
However they could muster only 24 votes as the majority of the UNHRC
47 members did not accept the operating paragraph 10 of the proposal
which entrusts the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
to conduct an investigation on the activities relating to the last
stages of the battle against terrorism in Sri Lanka.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navaneethan Pillay is a person
who has reiterated that there was no terrorism in Sri Lanka and it was
only an imagination of the Sri Lankan government. She has also called
for a war crime investigation against Sri Lanka on the last stages of
the humanitarian operation.
She first made this call in less than one week of ending the
humanitarian operation and reiterated it at several times at several
How could such a person with a predetermined mindset to be entrusted
with the task of such an investigation?
There is even no fund allocation for conducting such investigations
in the UNHRC. From where will they obtain necessary funds? Is Pillay
going to obtain funds from her LTTE rump?
Out of the 13 Asian members in the UNHRC and only South Korea voted
against Sri Lanka and out of the 13 African nations only four members
supported the US proposal.
US President Barrack Obama has intimidated many countries to support
the proposal saying that their friendship with the United States and his
future visits to those countries will be reviewed on their support to
The United States has defence cooperation agreements with many
countries and economic cooperation agreements with several other
countries. In this context, these countries are obliged to support the
United States even if they have good relationships with Sri Lanka.
South Korea was one such country that had been compelled to vote in
support of the US proposal due to American bullying.
The US proposal had been co-sponsored by several countries and out of
the countries that co-sponsored 31 were European countries and two North
American countries representing the United States and Canada.
It is not necessary to be a UNHRC current member to co-sponsor a
proposal. Australia and New Zealand are such members who had been
intimidated by the United States to co-sponsor their proposal and both
these countries rejected the American demand.
The US and the countries in the European Union are well aware that a
regime change, which has become a past time hobby of these
neo-colonialists, cannot be exercised in Sri Lanka through democratic
means as masses have reposed implicit faith in President Mahinda
Rajapaksa and the government.
Hence, the only mechanism that they can use for such a change is the
methods they deployed in countries like Iraq, Libya and Sudan.
They are making use of the “ever ready to betray the motherland
opposition groups” and the NGO mafia thriving on Western funds with the
objective of launching a regime change.
Sri Lankans have strongly demonstrated their solidarity with
President Rajapaksa and the development process of the government in the
elections held periodically. The West is acutely aware that they could
not harm the immense popularity of the President. Hence, they use
various other means to intimidate Sri Lanka.
As Pakistan had cautioned the UNHRC chief Pillai, taking unreasonable
action against Sri Lanka will exaggerate the challenges that the people
of Sri Lanka are trying to overcome after 30 years of separatist and
Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the UN Ambassador Zamir Akram
had pointed out that the country specific initiatives are
confrontational, counterproductive and seriously undermine the spirit of
cooperation and coordination on important human rights issues.
It is crystal clear that Pillay's report is not balanced and some of
the elements including the recommendation to establish an international
inquiry mechanism exceed the mandate granted by the Human Rights Council
Resolution 22 /1 to the High Commissioner. She must refrain from
advocating a course of action that will exaggerate the challenges that
the Sri Lankan people are trying to overcome after 30 years of terrorist
and separatist violence.
What is the most disappointing is the discriminatory approach
followed by the OHCHR with regard to placement of Sri Lanka's comments
in response to the report on the extra-net”. It is the time for the
international community to help the people of Sri Lanka to heal their
wounds and not penalise them for defeating the LTTE, at the behest of
the people still continuing to align themselves with these terrorist
There is a dire need to comprehend and comprehensively address the
enormous challenges being faced by Sri Lanka rather than penalising Sri
Lanka for rooting out terrorism from our soil.
Anyone with independent mind cannot agree with many of the
assessments made in Pillay's one-sided report which lie beyond her
mandate and which could be interpreted as interference into domestic
affairs of a state.
Reports of this nature will not help the normalisation of the
situation and lead to an escalation of tension. The Reports fails to
present comprehensively and objectively the achievements of the
Government.It is only through constructive dialogue and cooperation that
differences in the area of human rights can be settled. Exerting undue
pressure and confrontation makes the issue more complicated and could
rob country's hard-earned peace.
That is exactly what the West daydreams as they do not like to see
Sri Lanka progressing peacefully to gain its economic goals.