Colombo -- 7 March 2012
Tens of thousands took to the streets of Colombo and
other cities and towns, in the last week of February and into the following
week.
There were two oddities about these demonstrations of
“peoples’ power” – as some government politicians described them.
First, no-one was shot dead, no-one was tear-gassed, no
court orders were taken to ban public protests, the state media did not demonize
the demonstrators, and nor did cabinet
ministers blame “western-funded NGOs” for stirring up the people. Quite unlike
the repression and intimidation unleashed in other recent demonstrations.
Second, the issue at stake in far-away Geneva, appeared
not to be known or understood by the protestors.
They came waving the Sri Lankan flag, or carrying printed
posters of president Mahinda Rajapakse or defence secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse,
or holding banners and placards (printed of course at state expense and distributed
in state vehicles).
The messages were in favor of the unity and integrity
of the country, denying human rights violations and war crimes, denouncing the
US for supporting the LTTE (!), blaming the opposition UNP and NGOs for
supporting international intervention in Sri Lanka, and similar vein.
Some protestors were faithful supporters of the
government bused by local politicians from their electorates; others were
public officials who have long forgotten the difference between serving the
state and serving the government; or who were mobilized by government trade
unions they dare not offend; and some came simply for the ride and the goodies on
offer; or worse as in parts of the North and East through fear and coercion.
Ruling politicians including former UNPers, former
JVPers and former Leftists like Vasudeva Nanayakkara, along with the clergy
from all religions, joined the main protest outside Fort railway station on 27
February.
These government-organized and backed protests were
apparently a show of popular sovereignty in defiance of a draft US-sponsored
resolution to be debated at the current session of the UN Human Rights Council
in Geneva.
What is this resolution about? Does it recognize the
right of the Tamil nation to self-determination? Does it demand an independent
and impartial investigation of allegations of war crimes in Sri Lanka? Does it
propose to station international human rights observers on Sri Lankan soil? No.
The US resolution is titled “promoting reconciliation
and accountability in Sri Lanka”. Basically, the US government calls upon the
Sri Lankan government to (1) “implement the constructive recommendations” in
the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report; (2) to present
an action plan on steps taken and that will be taken to implement the LLRC recommendations;
and (3) to accept advice from the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human
Rights in undertaking the above. A time-frame of one year is given for a
progress report.
There is no direct reference to accountability for
violations of international human rights and humanitarian law that were
identified by the UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki-Moon’s, Panel of Experts report
in 2011, in its investigation into the conclusion of the war in 2009.
However, where the draft resolution also urges the Sri
Lankan government to “initiate credible and independent actions to ensure
justice, equity, accountability and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans”, there
is a hint of the unmentionable report.
Let us remember that the Lessons Learned and
Reconciliation commission was a process that was designed by the government to reduce
the international pressure on it concerning accountability for human rights
issues after the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009.
The mandate of the commission was decided by the
government, the members of the commission were selected by the government, the
time and resources available for its investigation was determined by the
government, and the testimonies in Colombo were heavily influenced by
government, pro-government and ex-government personalities, including Gotabhaya
Rajapakse and Sinhala nationalists.
Yet, to the surprise of its supporters and critics
alike, the LLRC presented a series of important recommendations including on
release of Tamil detainees, demilitarization of the north and east, land
dispute resolution mechanism, right to information law, independent public
institutions, respect for ‘rule of law’, and most controversially in supporting
political and constitutional reforms for power-sharing with minorities.
The LLRC’s weak point is that it played down gross violations
of human rights in the last stage of the war. Hence, the careful reference to
the need for accountability in the US resolution.
Since May 2009, the government regularly informed the
UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that it would conduct its own investigation
into the conduct of the war. After the LLRC was created, member-states of the
UNHRC were told to be patient and wait for its recommendations, and even
briefed on its 2010 interim recommendations which remain unimplemented.
Now that the LLRC recommendations have been released,
suddenly the same government that was trumpeting this mechanism – and that even
called on the opposition to support its recommendations when the LLRC report
was presented in parliament last year – suddenly takes offence to the request
that the recommendations of its own commission be followed in full, and that
asks the same question being asked by many within the island: as to how and
when these recommendations will take effect.
In fact, the present US resolution is milder and more
favorable to the government than the one it feared would be on the agenda of
the Human Rights Council this month.
For many months, international human rights
organizations, the pro-LTTE diaspora organizations, as well as some political
and human rights activists within Sri Lanka, have been lobbying for a stronger
resolution calling for an “international monitoring mechanism on
accountability”.
Such close international interest with the threat of
intervention in the internal political system would certainly be most unwanted
by the regime. However, in the present post-war euphoria and enormous popularity
of the president among the Sinhala masses, it could ironically strengthen his
hand by unifying the majority nation against an external enemy.
In fact, the mobilization against the current US
resolution is precisely for the purpose of regaining popular support that has
been slowly falling through anti-people policies such as pension reforms,
privatization of higher education, land-grabbing, and fuel price increases.
A more sophisticated diplomacy would have been for the
government to co-sponsor the US resolution, winning some allies and buying
itself more time through the “constructive engagement” of the so-called ‘international
community’.
However, for this regime, domestic goals are paramount while
street-fighting talk and public brawls are its signature; and this latest
attempt in reviving patriotic fervor has, at least for now, succeeded in
distracting attention from the unbearable increase in the cost of living and
economic insecurity.
This transparent maneuver to hoodwink the Sinhala
masses is being aided and abetted by the Left parties within the coalition, who
rail against the US resolution in the name of ‘anti-imperialism’, while meekly
appealing to their own government to implement the LLRC recommendations in
full.
Unfortunately for the Communist Party, whose Matara
parliamentarian and cabinet member Chandrasiri Gajadeera sees antharjathika kumanthranaya (‘international
conspiracies’) abroad in Geneva, the Communist Party of India – pandering to
its own electoral alliances with South Indian Tamil nationalism – has supported
the US resolution.
Imperialism is the main enemy the governmental Left
cries, avoiding any mention of their government’s adoption of International
Monetary Fund conditionalities in return for loans; its neoliberal monetary and
development policy veiled in populist rhetoric; and its headlong rush into
financialization of the economy, including through heavy borrowing from
international money markets and western banks.
The real issue, irrespective of the US resolution, is
whether or not the LLRC recommendations will be implemented in full. The drama
that has been enacted in our streets and on our television screens conveys that
there will only be half-hearted and token actions falling short of full
implementation.
What this rotten regime will not and cannot do, is to execute
even modest reforms that restrict in any way its corrupt, nepotistic and authoritarian
capitalist rule, and counter the Sinhala nationalism that is its ideological base.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.