THE PUPPET "GOVERNMENT"
The Rupavahini in its news bulletin in Sunday the 27th campaigned very crudely for the privatisation of the transport services. The "public" whom they interviewed were of the opinion that bus services and the railway should be given to the private sector. The impression I got was that the so called public do not mind even if the transport services are sold to foreign "investors". One does not have to be an opposition politician to tell that privatisation of the railways is on the cards. It may even be sold to foreign company(ies) for a song. The "government" is of the view that these ventures should be handed over to foreigners in order to "develop" the country. What else can a "government" that itself is de facto run by foreigners could come out with proposals for national development. This "government" for all purposes is not different from the so called reign of Don John Dharamapala.
The British high commission is happily taking fingerprints of those who apply for British visas from Sri Lanka. It could be using the latest developments of western technology, but what matters to those who want to get their visas to Britain from Sri Lanka is that they are being finger printed like IRAs, sorry IRCs. The British High Commission in its typical British way would say it is not the Sri Lankans who are being finger printed but those who apply for visas from Sri Lanka. Of course, a third secretary in the British High Commission could point out that there is a difference between a Sri Lankan and one who applies from Sri Lanka to get a visa. However the million pound question would be whether these non Sri Lankans are given special treatment and whether their numbers are sufficiently high.
If the British High Commission comes out with the figures of Sri Lankans and non Sri Lankans applying for visas, then we would be able to find out whether this emphasis on those who apply for their visas from Sri Lanka as against Sri Lankans who apply for British visas is only a British "plot". In any event could the British High Commission provide the names of the other countries where those who apply for British Visas are finger printed. It is ironical that Britain has taken this view soon after Sri Lanka had been declared a safe country. The irony is that most of the terrorists who went as asylum seekers to Britain are already there without their fingerprints taken by the high commission while the genuine who wish to visit that country are treated like criminals.
The minster of foreign affairs has said that when a friendly country wants to take the fingerprints of those who apply for visas it is not possible to say no to such a request. ( How can one say no aney attitude. There is a saying in Sinhala "Hitha Honda Geni Hemadama Badin" - The kind hearted woman is always pregnant) It is very unlikely that India would have given its approval to any such request merely because Britain is a friendly country. It is not the friendliness that matters but the "yes sir" attitude of the "government". It is said that the decisions on the fingerprint issue as well as the interim administration structure for the northern and the eastern provinces were taken while the Prime Minister Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe was in London few weeks ago.
The proposals on the interim administration given to the LTTE by the Norwegians are different from those in the document submitted to the President by the "government". Dr. G. L. Peiris has said that the differences were on the dots and the commas. However, the President as well as Mr. Lakshman Kadirgarmer have shown that more than dots and commas are involved and the question is why it was necessary to give a different set of proposals to the President. Was it to deceive her? Does it mean that even the "government" was not aware of the final set of proposals given to the LTTE by the Norwegians. It is very likely that the Norwegians, meaning the British and the Americans who are behind them, do not even consult the "government" before changes are made as they know that the decisions are not made by the "government". The de facto government of the country is in Oslo (London and Washington) and we are maintaining a so called government in order for some "MPs and minsters" and their sons and probably their wives to abuse powers within the country. One could ask how it is possible to abuse powers if the "government" does not have powers as such. The "powers" that the "government" has are only those that are being abused by the "MPs and ministers" and their kith and kin. With respect to politics, economics and culture (in a wider sense) the decisions are taken by the so called international community consisting of the Protestant Christian countries of the west, led by the USA and the UK.
What is happening to the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission? The LTTE has refused to vacate the camp in Kinniya even after the SLMM had asked them to do so. Now the SLMM has complained to the Norwegian government how naughty these "boys" have been. (Remember the term "our boys" affectionately used by the Tamil racists when referring to the terrorists). The SLMM has only a few more powers than the "government" and we are fortunate that the sons of the missionaries are not with them in Sri Lanka. Though the "government" that has less powers than the SLMM obeys the orders issued by the latter, the LTTE that has more powers than the SLMM, is not prepared to comply with their requests. According to the "Sunday Island" the LTTE has for the first time protested against a ruling by the SLMM. Another newspaper said that the SLMM would review its role in Sri Lanka. The SLMM has "raised questions about freedom of movement for its officers after an SLMM vehicle was stoned by groups allegedly linked to the LTTE".
Dr. Jayalath Jayawardane and Dr. Rajitha Senaratne must be wondering as to why the SLMM is complaining so much about a vehicle being stoned. At least the missionaries can roam about in the northern and the eastern provinces though one of the vehicles has been stoned. In the case of Dr. Jayawardane, he was not allowed to step down from his vehicle when he went to Jaffna. I have no doubt that the minister Mr. Maheswaran, who has no problems with the LTTE, is not very unhappy about this incident. In the case of Dr. Senaratne, he was prevented from going to Trincomalee by the "activities" of the LTTE. If the SLMM has questions on freedom of movement the two ministers in the "government" must be having enormous problems arising by the presence of the LTTE in the northern and the eastern provinces.
It is natural for the SLMM to complain to the Norwegian government that in effect appointed the SLMM, and that has more powers than the LTTE, and not to the "government" of Sri Lanka, that does not have even the powers of the SLMM. What would be the outcome of these refusals and complaints. Would the SLMM pack their baggage and go home? Very unlikely as they have not finished their job and also because they are expected to be the final decision making "authority" with respect to the division of the country. Unless the Sinhalas organise themselves and kick the SLMM out, they would demarcate not only the sea zones but the land zones as well of the Eelam. There is nothing to review with resect to the role of the SLMM and the missionaries would have to continue with their work. They would obtain more powers if the western countries go ahead with their plans to set up a so called UN peace keeping centre here.
What is the idea behind setting up of a "UN peace keeping centre" in Sri Lanka. There is no UNO as such and for all purposes this organisation has become an agent of the USA. In effect under the guise of a UN peace keeping centre, on one hand, Sri Lanka would be having so called international forces commanded by officers directed by the USA and the UK. These forces would be nothing but US and UK forces in effect and this could be a threat not only to Sri Lanka but also to India and other countries in the region. The Anglophiles in Sri Lanka would be happy as they would have some forces to "protect them" for the first time since the UK forces stationed in Katunayake and Trincomalee were asked to leave by the MEP government in 1956. (Those days unlike today we had a government in Sri Lanka.) The "UN peace keeping forces" would most probably be seen more in Trincomalee and would finally demarcate the Eelam with the support of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission. The role of the SLMM is to monitor the activities of the LTTE and the "government" of Sri Lanka with respect to the capitulation agreement that goes by the name "Memorandum of Understanding". The "UN peace keeping centre" would be asked to collaborate with the SLMM and the missionaries are not in danger of losing their jobs.
The "UN peace keeping centre", on the other hand, would weaken the Sri Lankan armed forces further. When there is an "international peace keeping centre" in the country the Sri Lankan army would be reduced to the status of a ceremonial army. The soldiers in the Sri Lankan armed forces if at all would be used in peace keeping activities in other countries and gradually the numbers in the armed forces would be reduced. The country is going back to the pre 1956 days politically and culturally and may be economically as well, with the difference that instead of one country we would be having two countries with Trincomalee coming under Eelam.
Sri Lanka and Eelam would be used by the so called international community led by America and Britain as the centre against all the other nationalist movements in the region. India would be under pressure and we would become the "paraiah state" or states in the region. However, this trend could be reversed if the SLFP understands what is in store for them according to the vision of the missionaries. It is true that after 1993 SLFP has become a different party due to Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga assuming the leadership of the party. However, the SLFP sentiments have not changed and hence though some anti nationalists would like to talk of a post 1994 SLFP there is no phenomenon as such. Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga is only the leader and not the party. The presence of some Trojan horses in the party and discarded "intellectuals" as advisors of Ms. Kumaratunga does not alter the nationalist character of the masses that support the SLFP. If the leadership of the SLFP does not take these factors into account, very soon the "post 1994 SLFP" meaning the post 1994 leadership would become only a footnote in the history of Sri Lanka.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>