|
India & the Struggle for Tamil Eelam
Implications of EU Ban on LTTE
B. Raman
Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India,
New Delhi,
and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai.
[Comment by
tamilnation.org:
The question that may arise in many minds is whether
Mr.Raman is reflecting New Delhi's concern for Eelam Tamils
or simply New Delhi's concern that on the one hand the
'International Community' (i.e. the trilaterals - US, EU and
Japan) may seek to resolve the conflict on their own terms
and cast New Delhi in a permanent subsidiary role, and on
the other hand concern about the increasing threat of a
China role a la Hambantota?] [see also
Indian General Raghavan(retd) advises International
Community on its Role]
The reported
decision of the Europen Union (EU) countries to declare the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as a terrorist organisation
and ban its activities in their respective territories would be
unimpeachable legally and on merits, but ill-timed, unwise and
ill-considered politically.
2. Ill-timed because the decision would come at a time when the Sri
Lankan Government of Mr.Mahinda Rajapakse and the LTTE have been
blaming each other for the escalation of violence, which has
characterised the ground situation since Mr.Rajapakse took over as
the President in November,2005. The truth of the matter is yet to be
established by an impartial international investigation, but
respected international non-governmental organisations have been
increasingly expressing their skepticism over the version of the
ground situation as disseminated by the Rajapakse Government and
over its bona fide.
3. In a statement issued at London on May 16, 2006, the Amnesty
International said: "Amnesty International is alarmed by the
increasing number of civilians killed as a low-intensity armed
conflict appears to be escalating, despite a 2002 ceasefire
agreement between the government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation
Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). More than 200 people have been killed
over the past month alone, the majority of them civilians, and more
than 20,000 others have been displaced from their homes. Amnesty
International fears that a collapse of the ceasefire agreement and
return to full-scale armed conflict would have further devastating
consequences for civilians.
4."In separate incidents over the past weekend, 13-14 May, at least
18 civilians were reportedly killed in the north and east of Sri
Lanka. Thirteen Tamil civilians were reportedly killed in a spate of
incidents on Kayts Island, a small islet off the northwestern coast
of the Jaffna Peninsula that is strictly controlled by the Sri Lanka
Navy, which has a major base there. On 13 May, at about 8.30 p.m.,
unidentified gunmen reportedly entered the home of Sellathurai
Amalathas in Allaipiddy and opened fire. Eight people were killed on
the spot, including a four-month-old baby and four-year-old boy, and
one other person died later in hospital. In another incident, at
around 10:30 p.m. the same night, unidentified gunmen reportedly
entered the home of 72-year-old Murugesu Shanmugalingam in
Puliyankoodal, also on Kayts Island, and shot him and two other
members of his family dead. Ten shops in Puliyankoodal were
reportedly burnt down. In Vangalady, gunmen reportedly entered the
home of Ratnam Senthuran, a tea shop owner, and shot him dead. Other
members of his family also were shot and injured, but managed to
escape.
5."The government has condemned the Kayts Island killings and
announced that a police investigation is underway. Amnesty
International welcomes these initial steps but notes that there is a
disturbing pattern of incomplete or ineffective investigations by
the government, with the result that perpetrators of such violence
generally operate with impunity. In accordance with the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Sri
Lanka has ratified, the government must carry out independent,
impartial and effective investigations into all killings; the
results of these investigations should be made public, and those
found responsible for the attacks must be brought to justice.
6."Without effective investigations and prosecutions, the cycle of
retaliatory violence that so endangers the lives of civilians is
likely to escalate. The LTTE has accused the Sri Lanka Navy of
responsibility for the attacks on Kayts Island, a charge which the
Navy has denied. However, Amnesty International has received
credible reports that Sri Lanka Navy personnel and armed cadres
affiliated with the Eelam People's Democratic Party, a Tamil
political party that is opposed to the LTTE, were present at the
scene of the killings. The government in turn has suggested that the
LTTE orchestrated the attack in order "to divert international
opinion".
7." Regardless of who is responsible for the attacks, the Sri Lankan
government has obligations under international law to take steps to
prevent such killings, to ensure that those who commit them are
brought to justice, and that the families of those killed are able
to obtain redress. Amnesty International calls on all parties to the
conflict, including the government of Sri Lanka, the LTTE, and other
armed groups, to take all possible measures to avoid harm to
civilians and respect international humanitarian law, which
prohibits murder or violence to those taking no active part in
hostilities," the Amnesty International's statement concluded.
8.In a statement issued on May 23,2006, the European Union itself
demanded action against those responsible for bombing three
international charities operating in Sri Lanka�s northeast. The EU's
skepticism about the Government's version , which blamed the LTTE
for the bombing, was evident from its statement which said that the
Sri Lankan Government must demonstrate its commitment to ending a
�culture of impunity� by bringing to justice those responsible for
Sunday�s grenade attacks which wounded three people at three
locations. It added: �The EU welcomes the Government's statement
condemning the attacks. But the EU is concerned about the lack of
effective follow-up on past violent acts and the development of a
culture of impunity that the government recognized last week in its
address to Parliament and pledged to fight.�
9. The apparent unease in the Government of India over the one-sided
version being disseminated by the Sri Lankan authorities in their
efforts to have the LTTE banned by the EU was also reportedly
evident at a press briefing on foreign policy by Shri Shyam Saran,
our Foreign Secretary, at New Delhi on May 23, 2006. It is learnt
that during the press briefing he characterised the situation as
"tit for tat violence" and did not agree with a correspondent of a
Chennai-based newspaper, who tried to project the situation as the
outcome of the LTTE's unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Gen.Sarath
Fonseka, the Commander of the Sri Lankan Army.
10. It is understood that the following report, which was carried by
"The Hindu" of Chennai on May 24,2006, was based on the Foreign
Secretary's briefing though it does not refer to him: " India
believes that if the current tit for tat violence between Colombo
and the LTTE continues, it is a matter of time before an all-out war
breaks out. Official sources on Tuesday also hoped that the Sri
Lankan Government would not greet with triumph a EU ban on the LTTE,
but would show flexibility, along with the Tigers, in agreeing to a
second round of peace talks in Geneva. "
11. The report added: " India felt that it was still worthwhile for
both sides to make concessions to ensure a return to negotiations.
New Delhi was specially concerned about the plight of civilians, who
invariably get entangled in a conflict situation. Pointing out that
about some 2000 Sri Lankan Tamils had already landed in Tamil Nadu,
sources revealed that several hundred more were waiting for a chance
to flee the violence that had gripped the island nation."
12. Not a day passes without more Tamil refugees from the Eastern
Province fleeing to India. When the LTTE took to arms against the
Sri Lankan Government post-1983, there was a large exodus of Tamil
refugees to foreign countries. Those from the Northern Province,
economically better off and better educated, fled to the Western
countries and Australia. Those from the Eastern Province, not
economically well-off and inadequately educated, fled to Tamil Nadu,
where they were put up in camps. Following an improvement in the
ground situation after the conclusion of the cease-fire agreement in
February,2002, and the initiation of conflict resolution measures by
former President Chandrika Kumaratunga and former Prime Minister
Ranil Wickremasinghe, the refugees from the Eastern Province started
returning.
13. This process has been reversed after Mr.Rajapakse took over as
the President and, since January,2006, there has been a fresh flow
of refugees into Tamil Nadu from the Eastern Province. Many of
those, who have come, have accused the Rajapakse Government of
following a policy of targeted killings of the Tamils of the Eastern
Province.
14. "The Hindu" of May 24,2006, has quoted some of the refugees as
saying as follows: "There is no guarantee of life in Trincomallee.
The Sinhalese, with the help of the Sri Lankan Army and Navy, have
started an onslaught against the Tamils. Several Tamil youngsters
have been kidnapped by unknown elements. Even after many days not
even a single kidnapped person returned home in our surroundings.
When they are torching shops run by the Tamils and shooting innocent
people in the name of controlling the Tigers, who can give us
safety? ........They (the Sinhalese) have plotted to wipe out all
Tamils living in Trincomallee. There is no rule of law there. Most
of the Tamil families have fled to either Jaffna or India from the
surroundings of Trincomallee. If the international community fails
to check the harassment by the Sri Lankan Army, the Tamil community
will not be found in the Trincomallee area."
15. The "New Indian Express" of May 26,2006, has quoted some of the
refugees as saying as follows: " The Tamils are not allowed to move
out of their homes even in daytime. The Sri Lankan Army and the
Sinhalese were continuously attacking and maiming Tamils. It was
only after the take-over of the Mahinda Rajapakse regime that
attacks against the Tamils had been stepped up."
16. Well-informed sources say that while the LTTE has been
responsible for the deaths of a large number of combatants belonging
to the Sri Lankan Army, Navy and Police since November last, most of
the civilian deaths are attributable to the policy of targeted
killings of suspected Tamil supporters and sympathisers of the LTTE
initiated by the Sri Lankan security forces through the intermediary
of the followers of "Col" Karuna, who deserted from the LTTE in
March,2004, due to differences with Prabhakaran, the LTTE leader.
Mrs. Chandrika and Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe reportedly refused to
authorise the policy of using Karuna for such targeted killings, but
this policy is being implemented vigorously since Mr.Rajapakse took
over as the President, thereby giving rise to a suspicion that he
might have authorised it.
17. The reported EU decision to ban the LTTE would be exploited by
the Government as the international community's acceptance of its
version of the killings which have been going on since November last
and as ruling out any international condemnation of its
counter-insurgency methods as followed since November. Any
non-condemnation by the EU of the new counter-insurgency methods of
the Government would be seen by the Sri Lankan Tamil community as
taking sides with the Sinhalese.
18. The reported EU decision at this juncture would be unwise and
ill-considered politically because it could create difficulties in
the working of the cease-fire monitoring process and drive even
those Tamils, who might be developing misgivings about the
leadership of Prabhakaran, into closing their ranks and expressing
solidarity with the LTTE. The Rajapakse Government is hoping that
the EU ban would isolate the LTTE and make it more amenable to a
compromise political solution, not necessarily involving a federal
formula. Its hopes may be belied and the EU ban, at this juncture
when both parties are responsible for the deterioration in the
situation, may drive the LTTE to be more recalcitrant, pushing
further away the chances of a political solution.
19. The difficulties in the working of the ceasefire monitoring
process would arise from the fact that while Norway is not in the
EU, Sweden, Denmark and Finland are. Would Sweden, Denmark and
Finland join the other EU countries in imposing the ban? If they do,
would it not make their continued participation in the monitoring
process untenable?
20. The LTTE is one of the most dreaded terrorist organisations of
the world, which was responsible, inter alia, for the
brutal assassination of
Rajiv Gandhi, our former Prime Minister.
Purely on
merits, a ban on it would be justified, but the timing and the
manner of the ban should not give an impression as if the EU is
taking sides with the Sinhalese extremist elements.
|
