EU AND CHANDRIKA
In two days we will know officially the candidates for the Presidential elections, and Friday would also mark the end of the road for Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga who was at the helm of Sri Lankan politics for the locals for about twelve years. It would also be the end of the Bandaranaike family politics, though not the end of the "Bandaranaike Policies". In fact "Bandaranaike Policies" would come back to Sri Lankan politics with the departure of the last member of the Bandaranaike family from politics. It was the daughter of the Bandaranaikes who threw away the "Bandaranaike Policies" in favour of Mahajana Party or Vijaya Kumaratunga Policies. Whether some people like it or not we are seeing the emergence of another fifty six, fifty years after the "ape anduwa". This time it is the "children of fifty" (panashaye daruwo) who have become the leaders of the "Jathika Balawegaya" or the nationalist forces, and it would not be a farce, as the oft quoted Marx's statement on history repeating itself. To me quoting of Marx by our "intellectuals" over and over again is a farce that only reflects the sterility of them who fail miserably at creating knowledge.
In any event the actions that Ms. Kumaratunga is taking against Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse have become a farce. At the felicitation held at the BMICH recently in appreciation of the services done by Ms. Kumaratunga to education, though not all may agree with the organisers who were mainly catchers and public servants who unfortunately have no option, on the "services" that were appreciated, she had apparently requested the people to vote for Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe. Of course the request was subtle, and most of the people would not have understood her, and would vote for Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse. I doubt whether even if they had understood her they would vote for Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe. Ms. Kumaratunga is fighting a losing battle with Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse and every round won by the Southerner would boost his morale. It would be better if Ms. Kumaratunga decides to stay in France visiting the other European Union countries that issue statements with words but without action. EU has become a NATO (no action talk only).
Though many politicians, political parties and others have welcome the recent statement by the EU, as a "giant" step forward, I cannot see much in it. EU has repeated its condemnation of the murder of Foreign Minister Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar repeating its stance of failing to name the murderers. The EU stand on this issue is not different from that of the UNP, and of Mr.Ranil Wickremesinghe who also does not name the murderers. Though one could always say formally that one does not know for definite that it was the terrorist organisation of tigers that killed Mr. Kadirgamar, it is clear from all the evidence that there was no other organisation capable of carrying out the murder. EU can hide behind words such as "a responsible organisation has to satisfy itself before naming an organisation as the killers", but having known how the EU has behaved in respect of the terrorist separatists it is clear that the EU is only involved in a game of words.
In any event as the declaration itself states, the EU had already condemned the murder of Mr. Kadirgamar. If so what is new in the statement, especially when they are still not prepared to name the murderers. They can condemn the murder from time to time without taking any action. It is not the only repetition that can be found in the declaration. It says "The European Union furthermore repeats its serious concern at the continuing recruitment and retention of child soldier cadres by the LTTE and reminds them that there can be no excuse whatsoever for this abhorrence practice to continue." This is only jargon, and I would say that there can be no excuse whatsoever for this abhorrence practice of issuing declarations to continue without taking any meaningful action. The EU may be different from UN, but we had sometime ago a man called Olara Otunu going to Vanni to meet the terrorists and getting promises from them that they would not recruit children anymore. What happened to all those promises?
Then the declaration says that "the European Union takes this opportunity to underline the statement of 19 September by the Co Chairs (who were ko ko federalists) of the Tokyo Donor Conference calling on the LTTE not least to take immediate public steps to demonstrate their commitment to the peace process and their willingness to change". What is important here is that the EU is only underlining a statement by the ko ko Federalists. Aren't there other statements by various organisations for the EU either to underline or to repeat? All these EUs UNs are playing "pandu" with us, and do we have to worry about these occasional statements decorated in the diplomatic jargon? In any event what is clear from the above statement of the ko ko federalists that has been underlined by the EU is that the LTTE has not yet taken any public steps to demonstrate their commitment to peace and their willingness to change. This could mean that the LTTE is committed to peace but they have not taken public steps to demonstrate it. The EU nor the ko ko federalists make any statement on the commitment of the LTTE to peace. They leave it to the imagination of the readers of their statements to speculate on the position of the LTTE with respect to so-called peace. From our experience we know that the LTTE is not committed to "peace" and hence they are not in a position to take public steps to demonstrate their commitment to "peace". It is known, through western practices that the diplomats lie on behalf of their countries. I would say that the diplomats cheat on behalf of their respective cultures, and modernity in general, as well. Does the EU following the ko ko federalists think seriously that the LTTE would change? Would Prabahakaran change because of these statements by the EU and ko ko federalists?
Then we come to the most important sentence according to some "political analysts", on so called travel restrictions. The relevant sentence appears in third paragraph. It says, "In the meantime, the European Union has agreed that with immediate effect, delegations from the LTTE will no longer be received in any of the EU member states until further notice".(Does until further notice means until a statement is issued to the contrary after the UNP comes to power?) This only means that delegations of the LTTE will not be received in the EU member states. It is clear that the delegations would not be received in the states obviously by the states or perhaps the governments. However, there is no restriction for any other organisation to receive an LTTE delegation nor for the state to receive an LTTE member in a personal capacity. Nor there is any restriction on any individual LTTE member to visit any country, and perhaps even live on extended visas or even become a citizen. Even if an organisation in a certain country cannot receive a delegation of the LTTE, there is nothing to prevent that organisation welcoming the LTTE terrorists in their personal capacities or as members of a front organisation of the LTTE. Anton Balasingham the well known terrorist is in UK, and he has no travel restrictions not only within UK but preventing him from going to any other country in the EU. As an individual, but not as a delegate of the LTTE he can go anywhere he pleases. He could give seminars, address press conferences get publicity, anywhere in Europe. If anybody thinks that after the statement of the EU Balasingham the terrorist would have to be deported from UK, then he/she is sadly mistaken. Also it is not impossible for an NGO in any of the European countries to meet a group of their paid servants that may include members of the LTTE.
The EU declaration that has been issued in the wake of the murder of Mr. Kadirgamar is only to mislead the others including those liberal minded people in their countries that the outfit in Brussels is concerned with human values whatever they mean. The declaration will be forgotten in no time, and the LTTE will continue to function as usual. Incidentally when is Mr. Otunu next coming to Sri Lanka to discuss matters with the LTTE leaders? It has to be realised that even though the EU declaration prevents a state in the union to receive a delegation of the LTTE, the state officials could always travel to Vanni to meet delegations of the terrorists.
The westerners will never dissociate completely from the LTTE. However, if they find that Prabhakaran is not behaving properly according to their standards they would drop him and get somebody else appointed in his place. The west has done that before in respect of many others in the world, and one must admit that their standards are not very "high" in respect of such replacements. People such as Marcos were allowed to do whatever they wanted before they were replaced. The west replaces them only when it is impossible to continue to support such people.
Though the EU declaration is very weak to say the least, the LTTE has already begun its theatrics "protesting" against the EU and other bodies. The UNP which is the direct agent of the non national forces has made a statement to a Tamil Language newspaper that it would protest to the EU and try to get the "restrictions" removed when they come to power. If that is the case then it means that the EU is not serious even on the "restrictions" and at the request of a UNP government it would remove the "restrictions". This clearly represents the anti Sinhala attitude of the present UNP leadership which tries to deceive the Sinhala people with rhetoric on a "Parakumba Era". However, the Sinhala people would not be deceived by the propaganda of the UNP, and the only person who could have damaged the chances of Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse is Ms. Kumaratunga herself. Her actions during the last few weeks indicate that she has lost power within the party, and the senior and junior members are gradually gravitating or geodesicing (to use an Einsteinian term instead of the Newtonian term) towards Mr. Rajapakse. Ms. Kumaratunga would be only a nominal president after Friday with no power, and it would not be a bad idea for her to look for a job with the EU, while she is in France.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>