Usha S-S boxed in from All Sides: A Singular Tamil Spokesperson

Padraig Colman, in the Sunday Island, where the title is “Who speaks for Sri Lanka’s Tamils?”

 Pic from Ministry of Defence

An article I posted on Groundviews on May 28 elicited many responses –http://groundviews.org/2013/05/28/sri-lankas-numbers-game/ On May 16, a seminar was held at the Marga Institute to launch a publication by the Independent Diaspora Analysis Group – Sri Lanka (IDAG-S) – The Numbers Game: Politics of Restorative Justice — http://www.scribd.com/doc/132499266/The-Numbers-Game-Politics-of-Retributive-Justice

Dr Godfrey Gunatilleke, Chairman Emeritus of the Marga Institute, opened the proceedings by answering the question: “Do numbers matter”. He acknowledged that, while even a low number of civilian casualties was cause for anguish, citing large and inaccurate figures could only inhibit the healing process.

Neither Tiger nor Lion: A Suffering Tamil Voice of Reason from Diaspora Land

A  Tamil in UK who must remain Anonymous … responding to Tamil nationalist commemorations of the Tiger and Tamil dead  and to a photograph by Robert Pinney [see below] depicting this event in mid-May 2013**

It really bothers me that the protest of ‘Tamils… gathered around photographs of those killed during the Sri Lankan civil war’ is being symbolized by people carrying the LTTE flag.  Anyone who protests that massacres of Tamils in 2009 should by no means do so under the Tiger flag. In 2009, the Tigers forced innocent Tamil civilians to remain in the Vanni – under pain of death. When I was working in the Vanni, I began to truly sympathize with the Tamils who stayed behind in Sri Lanka. They lost EVERYTHING under the Tigers and the GOSL      A shed with garlanded photographs of maaveerar, Batticaloa locality, c. 2004

ABC can foul. See Niromi! Hear Niromi! Without a Knox …. No Demidenko

Michael Roberts, courtesy of Groundviews where a different title was used, namely, “ABC, Gordon Weiss and authoress Niromi de Soyza”

Like many people I used to think that such agencies as the BBC and ABC provided balanced reviews and were relatively unbiased. No more. Further confirmation: a recent panel presentation by ABC in March 2013 that was anchored by Jane Hutcheon,** exposed in blatant nudity the lop-sided perspectives within Aunty ABC. The presentation was timed to coincide with the UNHCR sessions in Geneva where the USA was sponsoring a resolution censuring Sri Lanka. No problem with that. But this was a serious ABC review dependent on two questionable “experts,” namely, Gordon Weiss and authoress Niromi de Soyza aka Subhodini Mariatta Anandarajah – known as Subha among her pals. When Australia has a bevy of possible commentators, from Ameer Ali to Rohan Bastin, Serge de Silva-Ranasinghe, Shanaka Jayasekera, Laksiri Jayasuirya, Noel Nadesan and Suri Ratnapala to choose from, their selections on this occasion indicated partisanship.

Under Scrutiny: FIRE AND STORM reviewed by Sanderatne

Nimal Sanderatne, courtesy of Groundviews … http://groundviews.org/2013/04/17/review-of-fire-and-storm-by-michael-roberts/

     When Michael Roberts left Peradeniya in the late seventies, he was part of an exodus of intellectuals from the University of Ceylon, Peradeniya, arguably one of the best universities at that time. The exodus of academics at that time was compelled by the economic difficulties faced by university dons. It was the second wave of such emigration that diminished the intellectual life of the university and country. The Arts Faculty of the University of Peradeniya never regained its prestigious academic status after that. Today the University of Peradeniya cannot take pride in intellectuals of the eminence of E.F.C. Ludowyck, E.R Sarachchandra, H.A.de S. Gunasekera, Fr. Ignatius Pinto, Ian Van den Driesen and many others.

Niromi De Soyza’s Message to the Australians at Adelaide Writers’ Week

 Presented on 20 March 2013 — SEE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9uWKa5YfKQ

Thuppahi was led to this presentation of self by”Niromi” by a blog comment inserted in its ‘leaves.’ This was in the SECTION on “BOOK REVIEWS” rather than the initial review of Tamil Tigress by myself on 21 August 2011. I was on holiday when the Writers’ Week event took place, but those present at one of Subothini Mariatta Anandarajah, alias Niromi’s, presentations said that she shed tears on stage. Those present at two other events in Sydney and Melbourne also indicated that she burst into tears. The implications of this fact remain open to differing interpretations; but must enter everyone’s reading. As significantly, DBS Jeyaraj one of her erstwhile defenders, did not produce his fifth article as promised. In any event, apart from the different versions of the book the world is being presented with (see Bala’s comments) Subothini Anandarajah has shifted her stance and told her [silent] interviewer at Adelaide that she was confronted with the “enemy” when she functioned as  a female Tigress guerilla. But the first book’s back cover blurb speaks of her encounter with “government troops” during that first awful (because her bosom pal died) skirmish in December 1987 . Elsewhere in the book and in interviews she refers to encounters with both Indian and government troops. Again, one has to compare her initial 2009 newspaper account with the stories later. Unfortunately I was only led to the 2009 story AFTER I had written my initial essays.  The discrepancies are quite outstanding. Alas, readers seem to be guided by whether one is a good Tamil-for-the -Tamil-cause or a bad Tamil or a bad non-Tamil. Brand someone a government apologist and thereafter whatever  s/he says becomes unacceptable. Even women indulge in this tactic of playing the man not the ball.  Cheap tactics, simpleton minds! BALA  is a refreshing change [assuming he is truly a Bala].

Spare a moment’s reflection,too, for the Australian journalists and publishers who lap all this up without asking searching questions! Nikki Barraclough in Sydney reacted immediately when I first contacted her and sent the initial questioning of the book. She was on a flying visit abroad and said she would get back to me. Well, nothing followed. Likewise one of the book distributors in Melbourne who was organising a forum and inquired if I was available.When I said I would be severely critical and would not be a good choice, there was surprise expressed and I was not contacted again –no surprise that.         

Eelamist Extremism in Tamilnadu on the road to NOWHERE

Kusal Perera, in The Hindu with different title: “Martyrdom does not help Sri Lanka’s Tamils”

I read with much sorrow that Vikram, 30, set himself on fire and died in a hospital. He was the second such victim of the new campaign in Tamil Nadu for Eelam. The first was Mani, 41, from Cuddalore who set himself ablaze on March 4. Mani and Vikram will be remembered only when the numbers have to be counted if there is another self-immolation. But wait, where do they want this Eelam established and for whom? The separate State cannot be for Tamil Nadu. It cannot be for anybody there, nor for those students who are fasting and agitating.

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) raised a separatist demand for a “Dravida Nadu” many decades ago, but had to give up its call as, after the creation of linguistic States, there were no takers for Dravidian separatism. In 1963, the DMK officially dropped its demand. Murasoli Maran had said, “I am Tamil first, but I am also an Indian. Both can exist together, provided there is space for cultural nationalism.” A leading theoretician in the DMK, Era Sezhiyan, had said it was more practical to demand a higher degree of autonomy for Tamil Nadu, instead of a separate State.

Turning back the boats helps stem the Sri Lankan tide. Is this part of the solution for Australia?

Joe Kelly & Amanda Hodge, in The Australian, 28 March 2013

CO-OPERATION between Sri Lanka and Australia – and turning back asylum boats – is helping to beat people-smugglers, says Sri Lanka’s high commissioner Thisara Samarasinghe. As the Sri Lankan navy yesterday intercepted the first asylum boat to be picked up there for more than a month, the former naval chief said authorities had stopped more than 3000 asylum-seekers leaving on more than 60 boats last year. He defended the practice as safe and manageable.

 

Anticipated but avoidable extremisms, machinations, failures

Kalana Senaratne in The Island, 27 March 2013 where the title is “Geneva and Bodu Bala Sena: Two Dimensions of a Crisis“

There are tensions and schisms erupting, there is a crisis in the making. One dimension of this crisis is the unfolding diplomatic debacle: the Geneva-crisis. The group Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) represents, and gives expression to, another dimension. The emergence of both was to be expected; both, however, were avoidable.

Geneva-crisis: After Sri Lanka’s sui generis performance in 2009, the Geneva-story has been a depressing one to a lot of people. Sri Lanka’s support-base has dwindled drastically. India which, in 2009, opposed a Western-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka stood up to remind the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillai, where to get off. Today, India is endorsing Western or US-sponsored resolutions, and acknowledging in the process reports produced by Ms. Pillai. The contrast couldn’t have been more damaging than this.

India’s ‘Rotten Diplomacy’ in Sri Lanka Breeds Loathing in Lanka

Samanthi Subramanium in New York Times …. http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/indias-rotten-diplomacy-in-sri-lanka-breeds-loathing/imes

As a rule, living in Sri Lanka means encountering some of the friendliest people on earth. But since the civil war ended in 2009, it must be said, there is a startlingly consistent loathing for India, and a doubled such loathing for Tamils from India. This manifests all in the abstract, for the most part, but it is there nonetheless. Among other reasons, the Sinhalese are angry with India for funding and training the Tamil Tigers in their infancy, helping them become the monsters they became, and it is difficult to argue this point. The Tamils are angry with India for not intervening more decisively in the waning weeks of the war, to help stop the civilian carnage that occurred – and it is difficult to argue this point also.

Canberra, India ‘water down’ UN resolution on Sri Lankan human rights

Amanda Hodge, in The Weekend Australian, 23/24 March 2013

THE UN Human Rights Council has for the second year running condemned ongoing human rights abuses in Sri Lanka and called for an independent investigation into allegations of war crimes by both sides in the 26-year civil conflict. But international rights campaigners yesterday blamed Australia and India for the final watering down of the resolution, thus easing the pressure on the Sri Lankan government, by putting domestic political concerns ahead of human rights. Both countries eventually voted in favour of the US-sponsored resolution, which expresses concern at reports in Sri Lanka of continuing enforced disappearances, extra-judicial killings, torture, threats to the rule of law, religious discrimination and intimidation of activists and journalists.

After pushing for more conciliatory language, India tried unsuccessfully at the eleventh hour to toughen the resolution under pressure from allied Tamil parties that walked away from the ruling government alliance over its failure to take a hard stand against Sri Lanka. The resolution passed late Thursday with 25 votes in favour and 13 against. Sri Lanka rejected the motion and questioned the “inordinate and disproportional level of interest in a country that successfully ended a 30-year conflict against terrorism”.

US sponsors and human rights organisations have been pushing for several years for an independent, international war crimes and human rights investigation and expressed their disappointment yesterday at the failure of the Human Rights Council’s second resolution to demand such a probe. Instead the resolution asks the Sri Lankan government to conduct its own “independent and credible investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law” and to implement the recommendations of its Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission.

New York-based Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth said the original UN resolution had been watered down at the insistence of India, which had been seeking a consensus vote that would garner Sri Lanka’s co-operation. And he claimed Australia’s “belated” support for the resolution – which he attributed to fear that overt criticism would prompt a fresh flood of Sri Lankan asylum-seekers – meant an opportunity was lost to persuade regional fence-sitters to support the vote. “We know Australia fears any criticism of Sri Lanka that could turn the spigot on boatpeople, but we would hope Australia would press for an end to this impunity for mass murder,” Mr Roth told The Weekend Australian yesterday. “Frankly, Australia should not allow itself to be blackmailed by Colombo in this way.In the end the Australian government did the right thing by supporting the resolution, but it would have been more helpful if that support had been articulated earlier. It might have helped us to more easily overcome some of the reluctance elsewhere in the region.”

A 2011 UN panel found credible evidence that both the Sri Lankan military and Tamil Tiger rebels committed human rights abuses in the final months of the war in 2009, when thousands of civilians were trapped in a thin strip of land in northern Sri Lanka as fighting raged around them. It found as many as 40,000 may have been killed in the final five months alone, though the Sri Lankan government estimated the death toll at 9000.

Its Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission cleared the military of allegations it deliberately attacked civilians, though it did find some individual troops were guilty of violations.

Human Rights Watch yesterday claimed Sri Lanka’s “campaign of rampant denial, distortion and intimidation should be sufficient evidence that the Sri Lankan government will never hold its forces accountable and that an independent, international investigation is needed . . . Rather than take the Council’s concerns seriously, the Council has failed victims again this year.” Amnesty International also criticised the watered-down resolution, but commended the highlighting of ongoing human rights violations.

The resolution encourages the Sri Lankan government to co-operate with UN special mandate holders, but does not name envoys such as the special rapporteur on torture who has been blocked from visiting the country. Sri Lanka’s UN representative, Mahinda Samarasinghe, said the resolution failed to acknowledge progress made by the government in ensuring justice.

ALSO SEE Shamindra Ferdinando, “Geneva vote: GTF appreciates US role, not entirely satisfied with resolution,” in The Island 25 March 2013,http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=75487