Comments on: In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu

By: niranjan

niranjan — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:22:00 +0000

T Mama,
“Dr S seems very parsimonious at giving credit to the humanarion operation that was conducted, limiting the war to small arms and a defined exclusion zone for forcibly held civilians to escape.”- How sure are you that the Government did not use heavy weapons? No one from outside saw the fighting except for the army, the LTTE and the civilians caught up in it.

By: TMama

TMama — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 21:25:19 +0000

With regard to Dr Saravanamuttu’s opinion that ‘Western governments do not want a regime change’ I wish he came out with the explanations to substantiate this case.
How else can he explain the movement of vast amounts of cash to the opposition at the time of Presidential election. Surely $ 0.5 M that was found in the vault of a person close to opposition candidate could not have come from thin air. I saw earlier many including another NGO lady Ms Mani, proposing armed intervention into Sri Lanka, or building up the argument towards it by various NGOs in fact former British High Commissioner made a great show about poor governance in Sri Lanka. knowing well the shady pracitices everywhere.

Surely what came out in the expenses scandal, or many massacres in Iraq and Afghanisthan are not unknown to him. In fact if one were to believe what is reported in papers some minor operatives had go caugt in the very act of smuggling weaponry. Diaspora of course would like to have a direct hand in rebuilding war affected areas, and it is the legitimate function of the government that the process does lead to a resuscitation of defeated ideology of ancient Tamil homelands of the North and the East, flow of arms and ammunition once again.

Dr S seems very parsimonious at giving credit to the humanarion operation that was conducted, limiting the war to small arms and a defined exclusion zone for forcibly held civilians to escape.

I suggest that GROUNDVIEW conducts interviews with folks who came out of the clutches of LTTE, for example, the doctors who spent their time helping the civilians until the last days of the LTTE, about the dignity with which Northerners are assertinging themselves, rather than NGO operatives in Colombo.

By: Ravi

Ravi — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 17:34:19 +0000

Politics is only a passing time activity for me when there isn’t anything, worth the while, can be found, to do. I can’t be emotionalized myself for things that I am not getting paid. Now, coming to the point, the 4 or 5 interviews I watched are good, but this is the first time I am commenting on. Whether you are getting paid or making a living out of this stuff, I don’t know. Except for the interviewee, the opposition leader, Ranil Wickeramashinga, For him, I should think, more or less, this is a full-time occupation.

You are all talking the talk and walking the walk but I think there is something fundamentally wrong. What I think that is, is “The fear” Singhalese have over Tamils. Who can address this fear? Nobody.

Yes, It is right there is silent majority in Tamils. There is a silent majority in Singhalese as well who doesn’t want to harm the Tamils but this fear stopping them speaking out. I want be scare mongering on my part, just about.

By: In Your Face

In Your Face — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 02:46:57 +0000

Yo, yo, yo, check this out:

Certainly, there needs to be accountability and reconciliation. Someone needs to be held accountable for the women and children that were forced to blow themselves to bits in order to satisfy the nationalist dream of a megalomaniac, not to mention the Diaspora. Anyone who supported, or continues to support terrorism must be held accountable for all the atrocities committed in the name of “freedom”.

The government has to be more forthcoming in dealing with corruption and addressing issues of poverty and human rights.

As for the victims of LTTE terrorism, who is to be held accountable for their loses?

By: R

Thu, 22 Apr 2010 00:11:04 +0000

I believe that truth and accountability will be, and often are in complex emergencies, such as that which occurred early 2009 in Sri Lanka, a far reaching and maybe (unfortunately) an ideological aim. Government manipulation of aid to the Vanni stems back a long way in time, yet is only being considered in reflection. The government only directed minimal food aid to those suffering in rebel controlled areas- which gave the impression to the international community that something was being done to assist those court up in a so called ‘humanitarian’ disaster. The response from the aid agencies (due to government manipulation) remained largely technical (we saw the counting of displaced populations), rather than grievances of the deprived being qualitatively assessed as Saravanawuttu rightly suggests should have been the case.
Accountability of those events running up to the ‘end’ of the war cannot be reached under the current highly controlled information environment. Ejecting aid workers and journalists from September 2008 was a highly organised and effective way for the government to ensure that there would be no witnesses in the final weeks of the war. It is hard to hold one accountable for unwitnessed atrocities. Furthermore, by aid agencies being preoccupied with the delivery and access of relief, aid agencies failed to draw attention to grievances lying at the heart or roots of the conflict.
The prioritization of delivery of aid over advocacy has had ultimately adverse effects for the protection of the displaced, which has also shaped the international response. As an international community we have somehow allowed comments such as those given by the Defence Minister Gotabaya Rajapakse say ridiculous things such as ‘not one person has been killed in our ‘humanitarian operation’. We have made those in power to believe that total impunity exists.
I think the relationship between development and war in Sri Lanka is an interesting one. Sri Lanka has been able to maintain relatively high level of economic growth despite a long standing civil war. The process of liberalisation has had detrimental effects on ordinary civilians residing mostly in rural areas and the military it seems has played a pivotal role in curbing (at least trying to) revolts from often young people who had higher expectations for themselves. By increasing or nearly doubling the military since the end of the war, may seem counter intuitive, but I believe it may serve a function for peace on an economic/employment front.
Moreover, I entirely agree with that which was voiced in the interview regarding the cover up of grievances which have not been addressed, and indeed this is not the end of the conflict. Peace is often seen as the ending of a war, but in the case of Sri Lanka, isn’t ‘peace’ reconstructing the problem? Grievances lasting decades cannot just disappear without being addressed. The interview was talking about reconstruction in the north but shouldn’t we really be talking about something more significant than that? We often hear, aid agencies, the Sri Lankan government, UN and the international community talking a lot about ‘REhabilitation, REbuilding, REconstruction, or REintegration’- Lots of ‘RE’s are referred to in a post conflict situation. But why would you want to REcreate and REconstruct the same social and economic conditions prevailing before the start of the conflict?- The very conditions which caused conflict in the first place. Presumably we will only see conflict return. In a sense, the oven is still burning.

By: justitia

justitia — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:55:30 +0000

Before reconciliation, the Rule of Law, Social Justice and Goog Governance need to be established.
Will Mahinda Rajapakse even now implement the 17th amendment ( never mind the 13th for now).
This is what all of us are waiting for.

By: magerata

magerata — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:25:04 +0000

A baby does not walk in the first few days after it is born. The big baby, Sri Lanka needs a lot of naturing and encouragement. Engagement, dialog will bring that about. It does not mean, one needs to go nit picking bad stuff only. If the government does not do what needs to be done, there might be better ways to show it.
Economic development may not be the ultimate tool in bringing national unity, reconciliation, integration, it certainly stand to help, tremendously. When the stomachs are full and fields are farmed or factories are busy, people tend to give peace a chance.

You may see it not to your liking what the voters selected, but that does not put all the voters in a single basket called “hate mongers”. I believe, majority of Sri Lankans are peace loving people.
The other commenter, Guy’s mention of Singapore and Malaysia has a lot of merit, perhaps we can do one better. If we want unity, stop trying stick old labels on people, at least unite them in your thoughts, talks. Love and kindness have tendency to grow virally.
Again, I thank you for your efforts, and I hope they invoke people to react, peacefully and civilly.

By: Guy Gunaratne

Guy Gunaratne — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 13:32:15 +0000

Some key issues raised here. The definition of reconciliation itself and how it is shaped going forward is a debate that should, in my mind at least, be at the forefront of discussion. Truth and accountability are two things that seemed to be brushed under the carpet for most and I wonder where that leaves the open wounded. Those who bear grievances and in some cases grudges in Sri Lanka and abroad. Here in London it seems that there is indeed a ‘silent majority’ that Dr. Saravanamuttu mentions among the diaspora who while put off by the thought of dealing with the central government nevertheless have the willingness to engage with people on the ground. Given that there is also an element of pro-LTTE among a minority that still holds some sway over the majority (admittedly beginning to waver slightly now) But reconciliation here would prove more difficult with those staying silent for a good reason.

The idea that Sri Lanka is heading the way of Singapore and Malaysia is one that I have heard before. Speaking to a few ministers last summer when I was over there, this does sound like the intention for most, a lot of them kept using Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew to describe Sri Lanka and Rajapaske. An analogy that did not seem out of place during that hazy period in wake of celebration where the Rajapaske’s were heralded as saviors of our nation. But I agree that however long this style of governance will hold its legitimacy depends entirely on how it tackles those final three issues of peace, reconciliation and unity. But it also depends on how long the mindset among the majority remains one that holds the current regime as whiter than white and thus any criticism to the contrary being dismissed – let alone the ugly truths that went unaccounted for during those final months of the war and the disappearances and killings of the months that preceded it.

Guy