|
|
|
  |
| Sunday, 31 October 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Editorial |  |
| News Business Features Security
|
Please forward your comments to the
Editor, Sunday Observer. E-mail: [email protected] Snail mail : Sunday Observer, 35, D.R.Wijewardana Mawatha, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Telephone : 94 11 2429239 / 2331181 Fax : 94 11 2429230 Politicians, media and peace There is common agreement that Sri Lanka needs to resolve the National Question if it is to prosper. In fact, a return to war would ruin the future of not only present but also future generations. There has been a quest for a negotiated settlement for over a decade. Yet peace has eluded us so far. Now we are at a turning point in the course of our search for peace. Hence the need to be cautious and restrained in word and deed in the prelude to negotiations. The Government is sincerely committed to the negotiations. The President has shown much flexibility and practical wisdom in this regard. Yet the same cannot be said of some Ministers and UPFA leaders. The Opposition, true to its form is looking for excuses to evade responsibility. A glaring example is their boycott of the National Advisory Council on Peace and Reconciliation. The latest is a threat from Ranil Wickremesinghe warning the government that Tigers may convene a Constituent Assembly of their own in the North, if the Government convenes such an assembly in the South. While we reserve our comments for the time being on the advisability of the government move, Ranil Wickremesinghe seems to have become an advisor to the LTTE. In this context a big responsibility falls on the media to report and comment on the peace process in a responsible way. While accuracy, truthfulness and objectivity are supposed to be ingredients of a good news story, certain journalists have forgotten them in their craze for sensation. In an apparent preference to negative news they seem even to manufacture some in the absence of any. A recent example is the story about the resignation of the Head of the Peace Secretariat. He has, in fact, not resigned. Then came the story of how Anton Balasingham had gone back on the Oslo Declaration. To begin with there was no Oslo Declaration by the parties to the conflict. What is termed the Oslo Declaration was a statement by the Royal Norwegian Government on December 5, 2003 after the third session of the peace talks between the GOSL and the LTTE. This statement said inter alia "Responding to a proposal by the LTTE, the parties agreed to explore a solution founded on the principle of internal self-determination in areas of historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking peoples, based on a federal structure within a united Sri Lanka. The parties acknowledged that the solution has to be acceptable to all communities". True, the parties to the conflict agreed to this statement. This was nothing new to the LTTE. The LTTE has gone on record as stating the same fact earlier. They, however, always had a qualification that should internal self-determination fail, they would seek external self-determination or secession. That is what Anton Balasingham had explained in his new book, which was quoted out of context by certain media. The media was in fact led astray by the former UNF government which went to town that the LTTE had made a paradigm shift by accepting a federal solution whereas in fact the shift was in the UNP which had up to then vociferously hung on to the unitary state. US Presidential Election Tuesday's US Presidential election has attracted much attention throughout the world. It is natural, since whoever gets elected would be the most powerful man on earth by virtue of the economic, technological and military might of the United States. Several issues have taken center stage during the campaign. They include inter alia war on terror, Iraq, security of the USA, domestic economy and social welfare issues. The campaign has generated unprecedented heat. Confrontation is so high that whether the loser would concede defeat or cry foul is an open question. This is especially so in view of the last Presidential election where the victor was declared not by the voters but by the Supreme Court in a controversial hearing. Allegations of mass scale voter de-registration as well as registration of unqualified voters are raised by both sides. The Blacks fear they would not be able to vote in many polling stations due to intimidation. Voting, in any case, in the US elections is not dense. Sometimes the total vote drops even below half the number of registered voters. The whole campaign is commercialized and as a campaign manager of a former President wrote in his memoirs the President is sold to the public just as any other commodity like toothpaste etc. As far as the international community, particularly the Third World, is concerned there is hardly any choice between the two contenders - George Bush and John Kerry. The basic US policy would remain the same with only minor tactical changes in its foreign policy. Whatever that may be November 2 will be a day that will certainly decide the course of geo-political changes in the coming months. |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security | Produced by Lake House |
