Sunday Observer Online


Sunday, 30 March 2014





Marriage Proposals
Government Gazette


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.

Thousands killed

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 Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Fearless leader

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 Sri Lankans.

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 hard-earned peace.

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 locations.

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 proposal.

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.

Regime change

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.

NGO mafia

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 terrorist violence.

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 forces.

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.


Donate Now |
LANKAPUVATH - National News Agency of Sri Lank
Telecommunications Regulatory Commission of Sri Lanka (TRCSL)

| News | Editorial | Finance | Features | Political | Security | Sports | Spectrum | Montage | Impact | World | Obituaries | Junior | Youth |


Produced by Lake House Copyright © 2014 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.

Comments and suggestions to : Web Editor