Intl Humanitarian Law...(For all intents and democratic purposes)
By Chandi Sinnathurai
26 August, 2010
Countercurrents.org
People have strong opinions about the credibility of the Sri Lanka Lessons Learnt Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). In a democracy, each person is entitled to have their opinions. Both their rights and privileges are protected by the state; even for an opposing voice, advancing a contrary argument. We do not know how much of a "free country" Sri Lanka is in this sense. However, what an ex-UN Under Secy General Dhanapala has said while testifying before the LLRC is worthy of serious consideration. (See Appendix)
In the theatre of war when the conflict is between conventional Armed Forces and "Non state actors" would such a conflict, as pity as this, is still bound by Rules of Engagement (RofE)?
Perfectly a sound question. Nonetheless, it is not without moral implications. Too many innocent lives are lost.
What happens when the state forces are NOT bound by RofE chooses to act with total impunity; with flagrant disregard for international laws and principles? Sri Lanka's war was an under-reported conflict in the intl media, and a "War without witness."
On the other hand, in the theatre of war in Sri Lanka the "Non-state Actors" considered themselves to be a conventional standing army. In many ways they were complete with military fatigues. Of course, the International community did not buy this argument and they showed their protest by slapping proscription on the Tamil Liberation Movement.
But now, when the war guns are silenced the intl community - that is to say, most Western democracies, are suddenly concerned about the humanitarian issues, war crimes allegations and reconstruction. There are however competing intentions of dominance in the region and mercantile motivations at play here. But all these are neatly couched in moral, ethical garb. International relations doesn't revolve around an altruistic axis.
The hypocrisy of the world democracies is such that it all depends whose side the "Non state actors" seem to lean on. If they happen to be on the right side of the "Democracies" then they will be greeted as liberationists and even provided with 'Goodies' to battle with. The state of affairs radically altered after acts of terror were committed right at the heart of the Land of the Free. The War Against Terror ought to have made a paradigm shift in the operational mind of the Tamil Liberation Movement. Sadly, that was not to be. Whether it is owing to hubris, miscalculation, or the belief in invincibility - no one will known for sure. But all we know is, it led to complete liquidation of the leadership and collapse of the Movement in its dynamic impetus, particularly in the home territory.
What we are witnessing now in the diaspora is a soulless liberation façade. Total balderdash and piffle!
It is necessary a human right to save and protect humans. Keeping human shields of innocent women, children and men is a despicable act - it does not matter which side has done that: There is no moral gut in winning the conflict by the sheer tactic of withholding innocent unarmed humans of their dignity of life and right to live!
The Ex-UN Diplomat has proposed that the Tamils ought to be recruited into its Armed Forces. Not a bad idea, for a starter. It could also be a cosmetic exercise.
The underlying thread of Dhanapala's argument is that Sri Lanka's war was not a civil war. To put it differently, it is not Sinhalas v Tamils. Hence, he deduces that the intl laws be reviewed accordingly. The distinction he draws is that it is a Sovereign State fighting a war against terrorists. One cannot however cop-out from the fact that, from the Tamil Movement angle the struggle was a "War of grievance" not of greed. But that is not the case, as it appears, in the current agitation of the diaspora.
The Tamil Liberation Movement was an organised armed struggle. It saw that their struggle was against the majoritarian Sinhala state. The Movement perceived the institutionalised racism and state-sponsored violence as state terror. That was probably the primary rationale.
Whether the ground reality has changed now is matter of opinion.
However, the Defense Secretary Gota Rajapaksha, like a true soldier has said that (according to KP's recent interview to the Lankan Press) he has great admiration for Talaivar Praba - who fought until his last breath like an honourable liberation leader and also sacrificed his whole family to the cause. To respect an 'enemy' in this way is an honourable act.
Where as the diaspora weasels and stoats including couple of bleeding-heart South Indian politicians with Kasi Ananthan of all people began to claw the straw and crow: Praba is alive. None came forward even to this day to honour the dead. Tamils worth any salt, shall discern these blood suckers by their fruits!
The real struggle of how to be free has begun...free of gun shots, abductions, mad politicians, racist thugs, religious fanatics, pimpernels, and diaspora pretenders to the throne...
Plenty of lessons to be learnt...to learn and NOT make the same mistake twice. And this is true of all, both the Tamil and the Sinhala communities.
Say, NO to WAR. That is the first lesson!
APPENDIX:
Ex-UN Under Secy General tells LLRC: Intl. laws shouldn’t apply to conflicts between States and terrorist groups
August 25, 2010, 12:00 pm
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Terrorists shouldn’t be allowed to exploit international covenents says ex-UN diplomat, who believes the government has no option but to face international scrutiny over alleged human rights violations in the aftermath of war against LTTE terror.
Veteran diplomat Jayantha Dhanapala says International Humanitarian Law (IHL) should not be applied to Sri Lanka’s war against LTTE terrorism and the time is opportune for the country to push for new guidelines.
The former head of the Peace Secretariat says a conventional army cannot be bound by international laws in fighting a terrorist organisation, which deploys suicide cadres, child soldiers and human shields.
Ambassador Dhanapala called for international consultation among member States of the UN and other stakeholders such as the NGOs to work out a mechanism.
Testifying before Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission on Wednesday (Aug. 25) at the Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations, Dhanapala said that many of the Rules of War and International Humanitarian Laws were based on the assumption that the warring parties were conventional armies of states but in Sri Lanka’s case the LTTE had totally disregarded those laws and principles.
Asserting that terrorism could not be justified, Ambassador Dhanapala said that in the post-LTTE era Sri Lanka should initiate a dialogue with the international community on the subject of counter-terrorism. He said that conventional armies could not be expected to react to the threat posed by the LTTE the way they faced a conventional military threat.
Ambassador Dhanapala submitted a comprehensive written proposal to the commission.
In his brief but thought provoking presentation and in response to queries by the commission, the much respected international diplomat urged the government to engage the global community in a civilised way. Referring to the US-led international military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Bolivia’s battle with FARC, Ambassador Dhanapala asserted that there should be a dialogue among countries battling terrorism. Sri Lanka should discuss the issue with the ICRC, he said.
Ambassador Dhanapala emphasised that the government should address human rights issues raised by the international community. The government should be prepared to respond to international concerns, he said, while emphasising the importance of exploring the possibility of accommodating Opposition and NGO representatives in HR delegations as part of measures to improve relations with the international community.
The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation commission headed by former Attorney General C. R. de Silva is expected to finish its work in six months. The sittings began on Aug 11
Commenting on right of humanitarian intervention (aka Responsibility to Protect or R2P), one-time top UN official emphasised that countries, which sponsored and directed terrorism against other countries, too, should be held accountable by the international community. In an obvious reference to India’s role in setting up bases for Sri Lankan terrorists in the early 80s, Ambassador Dhanapala said that those who sponsored terrorism should take the responsibility for the situation it had created as in the case of Sri Lanka. He said that those who had facilitated the LTTE to receive funds, too, were equally responsible for Sri Lanka’s misery.
At the outset of Wednesday’s sittings, Ambassador Dhanapala said that there was no need for him to testify in camera as he did not have anything to hide.
Ambassador Dhanapala said that the army had had o fight in extremely difficult conditions, particularly due to use of human shields during the final phases of war. Praising the army for having brought the war to an end with the minimum loss of civilian life, he appreciated the way the army had brought the war to an end though their operations had been hindered by the presence of some 300,000 civilians. He echoed Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa sentiments that efforts to save civilian lives had caused losses to the fighting forces.
The former UN Under Secretary General for Disarmament Ambassador Dhanapala said that now that the LTTE had been destroyed the government should step up its efforts to recover weapons in the hands of various unauthorised persons. He said that there had been private armies and some politicians commanded security units. But, the end of war in May last year, had given President Mahinda Rajapaksa an opportunity to implement a programme on the lines of Mathata Thitha to eliminate all unauthorised weapons. In a post-war era, it should be a priority, he said.
Ambassador Dhanapala strongly condemned the destruction of LTTE cemeteries in the liberated areas. The families of the combatants should be allowed to move the remains of their loved ones who had died fighting for the LTTE to cemeteries of their choice.
While welcoming a decision to recruit Tamil speaking youth to the police, Ambassador Dhanapala said Tamils should be accommodated in the armed forces as well.
