CONTENTS
OF THIS SECTION |
Terrorism: United States Law & Practise
|
Tamils in USA |
Interventions by US Government Officials |
Interventions by US
Legislators |
Interventions by
Tamils in USA |
US Proscription of
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam - Law & Practice |
US Trade & Military Interests in Sri
Lanka |
US
Pacific Fleet Commander meets Sri Lanka Defence Secretary, 17 January
2008 |
U.S. Military Assistance to Sri Lanka Continues, 8 November 2007 |
Sri Lanka seeks US petroleum investors,
24 April 2007 |
U.S. grants LKR 51
million for petroleum exploration in Sri Lanka |
US Admiral Thomas Collins hands
over US Coast Guard Vessel �Courageous� to Sri Lanka Navy, June 2004 |
Peace & Surveillance:
US gifts Coast Guard Surveillance Vessel, USS Courageous to Sri Lanka 30
March 2005 "Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) and the Commander of the Sri Lanka
Navy, Vice Admiral Daya Sandagiri, said in Colombo that the inclusion of
a 210 foot US Coastguard Vessel, USS Courageous will increase our
naval power by 75 percent.. Speaking to the media after the ceremony, US
Ambassador Jeffrey Lunstead was quoted by Sri Lanka State managed
Daily News as saying: "I hope the newly added ship will protect Sri Lanka
and will help to
bring peace to the country. After all it is what we all want.." |
The Israeli-American Connection & the Militarisation of Sri Lanka - TIC
Publication, June 1986 |
US State Department Human Rights Report
on Sri Lanka
2007 -
2006 -
2005 -
2004 -
2003 -
2002 -
2001 -
2000 -
1999
-
1998 -1997
-
1996 -
1995 -
1994 -
1993 |
US State Department & Democracy, Sri Lanka Style - Nadesan
Satyendra, 1985 |
Statement of
Karen Parker, J.D., before the Sub Committee on Near East and South South and
Central Asian Affairs, Committee of Foreign Affairs, United States Senate,
24 February 2009 |
US Congressional Human Rights Caucus
Briefing March 1999 |
Congressman F.H. Faleomavaega |
Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr |
Congressman Bill Luther |
Karen Koning Abuzayd, UNHCR |
Joseph Scalise, World Food Programme |
Miriam A. Young, Asia Pacific Center for Justice and Peace |
Richard Reoch, Chair, International Working Group on Sri Lanka |
US Congressional Human
Rights Caucus Roundtable December 1998 |
Human Rights Caucus Invitation |
Coleen Malone, Asia Pacific Center for Justice & Peace |
Richard Reoch, International Working Group on Sri Lanka |
Elizabeth Bowen - Bowen Group |
US Congress Sub Committee
on Asia & Pacific 1995 |
US State Department Statement |
Amnesty Statement |
Professor Singer Statement |
Memorandum by Action
Group Of Tamils, 14 November 1995 |
US Congress Sub Committee on Asia & Pacific
1987 |
Karen Parker |
Other Assessments |
Written
statement submitted by International Educational Development at UN
Commission on Human Rights, March 2006, "
United States has substantial interests in Sri Lanka, especially as the
United States seeks to expand its role and power in Asia...Understanding
the interests of the United States in the Tamil areas of Sri Lanka goes a
long way to explaining the United States� overt actions in relation to the
conflict in Sri Lanka, the most prominent being its harsh rhetoric against
the Tamils and their leadership under the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
(LTTE)..."
more |
U.S.Policy Towards Conflict in Sri Lanka - C.Yusuf Mumtaz, April 2004 |
|
|
INTERNATIONAL FRAME
&
Tamil Struggle for Freedom:
United States
[see also Tamils: a Nation
without a State - USA]
"Resolved, that the Massachusetts House of
Representatives hereby urges the President and the Congress of the United
States to support the Struggle
for Freedom by the Tamil Nation for the
Restoration and Reconstitution of the
separate
sovereign state
of Tamil Eelam and to recognise publicly the
right of self determination by the Tamil people of Tamil Eelam"
House of
Representatives Resolution, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, USA, 18 June
1981
US Strategic
Interests in Sri Lanka
Taraki, 30 July 2005
Dharmaretnam Sivaram, popular military analyst and
senior editor at TamilNet was working on this feature
when he was abducted and killed on 28 April 2005.
What are the US government�s strategic interests in Sri Lanka? If the US has
specific strategic interests in the island, then what are the means and modes by
which it was and is securing them?
The US government�s strategic interests in Sri Lanka are
intertwined with its military objectives in South Asia and Asia.
Therefore a brief overview of the strategic objectives of the US in
Asia in general and South Asia in particular is necessary to identify
and understand the development of US army and intelligence interests in
Sri Lanka.
Central to the US strategic objective in Asia is the desire to �preclude
the rise of a regional or continental hegemon.� The objective is
considered important for two main reasons:
�To prevent the United States from being denied economic, political and
military access to an important part of the globe.
�To prevent a concentration of resources that could support a global
challenge to the United States on the order of that posed by the former
Soviet Union.�
The US believes that no nation in Asia poses such a threat to it at
the moment. But it believes that China, India and Iran have the
potential to develop into continental hegemons either on their own or as
partners of regional coalitions including Russia that could threaten US
interests in Asia and, in the long run, in the world.
A declassified section of a study commissioned by the US Department of
Defence discusses three ways in which the US can preclude a country from
becoming a regional or continental hegemon. A fourth method is also
pointed out here.
1.Convince the country in question that its security interests
are best served by letting the US maintain an active military role in
the region.
2. Build military alliances with other countries of the region
with a view to eventually acquiring the power to shape developments in
the region by expanding USAF basing opportunities for projecting US
power in the region to deal with a wide range of "scenarios and
operations."
3. Prevent the country from �bandwagoning� with other
potential regional powers �to undercut critical US strategic interests
in Asia.�
4. Build political and economic relations with countries in
the region least likely to challenge US strategic interests with a view
to support the formation of ad hoc or US led UN operations to deal with
challenges posed by the �potential regional hegemon� that might concern
the US and its allies.
In this context, the chief concerns of the US in South Asia are to:
Preclude or dissuade India from developing its nuclear and
ballistic missile capability.
Preclude India from �bandwagoning� with either China or Russia or
both or with France to undercut US strategic interests in Asia.
The US seeks to do this by, among other things, propagating the
impression of and/or by actually developing close relations with, India.
Eventually convince New Delhi that its interests are best served by
letting the US look after the overall strategic stability of the
subcontinent. To do so the US has to enhance and consolidate its
strategic presence in the South Asian region while ensuring that the
Indian military remains stretched to the maximum so much so that Delhi
cannot set aside any military surplus to project power or preserve its
vital interests in the neighbourhood. Boosting Pakistan�s military
status is key to this approach.
Today India�s mutual defence treaty with Russia has been watered down
and hence is no longer a deterrent to the projection of US power in the
region. However, land warfare in the subcontinent cannot be part of
projecting US power in the region today, as it would involve high
casualties amid limited tactical possibilities and forward basing
facilities for US expeditionary forces on a scale required to fight the
Indian army.
The strategic deployment of the USAF with support from the US pacific
fleet has therefore become the main means of projecting US power in the
subcontinent now. And more importantly, it would also be the main
component of enhancing and consolidating America�s strategic presence in
South Asia.
The US Department of Defense (DoD) studied and identified basing
requirements in the region � requirements that could be expected to
arise over a wide range of scenarios and operations, chief among which
were full-scale war between India and Pakistan and Indian military
�aggression� into neighbouring countries.
It was also decided to increase reconnaissance activities by sending
�additional surveillance assets� to the area. The US army was mainly
tasked to provide these �assets� which included the enhancing the
presence of the National Security Agency (NSA) in Sri Lanka.
Intelligence preparedness for all possible scenarios was as important as
developing basing opportunities for US expeditionary forces in South
Asia.
This was done also with a view to monitoring the nuclear and missile
development facilities in peninsular India. Currently the eastern
littoral of the subcontinent and most of peninsular India is monitored
from Thailand and Singapore where the US Defence Intelligence Agency and
the NSA have considerable electronic intelligence and �other� (mostly
humint access) assets. The NSA base in Thailand monitors, among other
things, LTTE communications in Sri Lanka � for ex: the Voice of Tigers
is made available in English to Washington HQ in less than an hour of
broadcast by NSA translators at the agency�s station in Thailand.
A declassified section of a US DoD study of basing opportunities to
support USAF operations in the subcontinent notes that they are
"somewhat limited in this part of the world." The study observe further,
�Diego Garcia is the permanent US outpost nearest the subcontinent, but
we use the term �near� advisedly � for that base lies approximately 2500
nautical miles from Islamabad. (The base is approximately the same
distance from Kashmir�) and 2200 nautical miles from New Delhi.�
The study identifies three general regions for basing opportunities
around India. They are east, west, and north of India.
The first region is east of India. "This region has limited facilities
and relations between Burma and the United States are stressed," the
authors say. Finally given the proximity of this region to China,
opportunities for close military relations may be limited in the event
of heightened tensions."
"The second region consists of Central Asian republics. Improved
access to South Asia could grow from enhanced relations with these
former "Soviet republics." The study notes that Central Asian states
such as Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan could serve as valuable entrepots to
the Subcontinent.
�The third region is the Middle East, and it is here that we see the
most prominence for conducting operations in South Asia. As was shown
during the Gulf War, the air base facilities in this region are second
to none, and the governments in the region are relatively stable, often
with national interests that align with those of the United States."
With regard to geography, Oman is closest to the Indian-Pakistani border
� about 500 nautical miles. Relations between the government of Oman and
United States are good, and Oman has shown itself to be a steadfast
ally. In addition the basing infrastructure is well developed. Two bases
� Seeb International and Masirah Island � are particularly well suited
for the conduct of USAF operations�. (This part of the document provides
a guideline to a similar but still classified study of USAF basing
opportunities in Sri Lanka. See below for further details)
The other bases available to the USAF for operations in South Asia are
in Thailand and Singapore. The US has a long-standing defence treaty
relationship with Thailand and use of a Royal Thai naval air station in
U Tapaho. It has a similar defence treaty arrangement with Singapore.
But the above-mentioned US DoD study notes that New Delhi is 1600 nm
from Bangkok bases in central Saudi Arabia and 2600 nm from Singapore.
Therefore the US began to actively look for and seek basing
opportunities in countries closer to India from 1990. In this process,
the US availed itself of intelligence, military, diplomatic and economic
leverage and access enjoyed in the target countries by its main security
partners i.e., Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea,
Thailand and Singapore.
It should be noted in this context that the US is only seeking and
looking for basing opportunities in South Asia but not constructing new
military installations for USAF operations.
According to the DoD study, �The identification of bases that are
currently capable (or nearly so) of supporting USAF operations has both
political and financial advantages. There appears to be little appetite,
either in the United States or in the region, for the construction of
additional American military installations�The bases identified in this
analysis should not require significant upgrades that could be costly in
terms of either USAF budget dollars or American political capital.�
The study focused on five key attributes: the length of the runway(s) at
the facility, runway width, the amount of ramp space, the number of
fighter sized parking spaces available, and whether or not weapons
storage is available. It also looked at pavement loading characteristics
(which are critical to operating large heavy aircraft such as
air-lifters), the availability of fuel and �other factors�.
The US �access strategy� for the Indian subcontinent, according to the
DoD study, is centred on �increasing opportunities for deployments and
exercises and on the development of contingency agreements with
potential security partners in the area� � Sri Lanka, Bangladesh,
Maldives and Nepal. It should be noted here that the �access strategy�
also includes plans to significantly increase �electronic and other
intelligence assets� in the territories of potential security partners
in the region.
Sri Lanka was a prime candidate for two reasons:
�The central position of the island between the Straits of Malacca and
Hormuz�. The US DoD study observes that Sri Lanka�s �infrastructure for
basing opportunities are excellent�. The USAF, DIA team that visited
Palaly, China Bay, Sigiriya, Koggala and Kuda Oya in 2001 did a brief
update regarding Sri Lanka of the RAND study �The US and Asia: Toward a
New Force Posture. (A public version of the study is available at the
RAND Corp. It does not give the true picture) The research for South
Asia project was sponsored the US Deputy Chief of Staff for Air and
Space Operations, US Air Force and the Commander of the US�s Pacific Air
Forces.
A classified version of this update on Sri Lanka was given to the Sri
Lanka Air Force and Army headquarters and DMI for comments. It was
basically about improving Palaly, China Bay and advantage of building
new international dual-purpose airfield in Kuda Oya. If the update is
read together with the RAND report it gives a clear picture of US
strategic aims in developing Palaly, Trinco, Kuda Oya.
Sri Lanka�s military and intelligence services had long-standing and
close institutional relationship with the British MI6, MI5, and the
Central Intelligence Agency. The MI6 provided the main component of the
training program for the Special Branch, which became the NIB in 1984
(and currently known as the Directorate of Internal Intelligence).
The CIA and MI6 second work to the NIB on specific matters and have
access to its registry on formal request. The official from CIA�s
Colombo station who liases with the NIB (usually through the NIB�s
additional director although there is a section head in there who deals
with foreign missions) holds the position of �regional security officer�
� an �unlisted post� in the US embassy.
(The CIA station chief in Colombo is the Deputy Chief of Mission of
the US embassy) The CIA station in New Delhi also liases with the DII on
specific projects.
The world�s largest intelligence organization, the National Security
Agency (NSA), has a presence in Colombo and works through the US
army/Defense Intelligence Agency office in the US mission in Colombo.
The level of its operations is not clear.
The DIA/NSA stations report direct to their headquarters in Washington
DC. The CIA is under the purview of the Ambassador.
NSA/CSS representatives work on State Department or US army postings in
US diplomatic missions abroad. Some former second secretaries in the
Colombo mission appear to have been NSA/CSS personnel, seconded through
the state department.
The CSS � Central Security Service � is an arm of the NSA, which, among
other things, manages the agency�s listening posts and operations in
countries other than the primary security partners of the US. (The NSA
has its own �ambassadors� called Special US Liaison Officers � SULOs �
in the capitals of America�s primary security partners � London, Ottawa,
Tokyo, Bangkok, Canberra, Wellington, Seoul and Singapore).
The Defence Special Missile and Astronautics Centre � DSMAC, another arm
of the NSA, which is tasked to do �initial analysis and reporting on all
foreign space and missile events�, stepped up its monitoring activities
and resources on India in the last six years. The NSA came under
particular pressure to enhance its �surveillance assets� in the region
after it failed to report in advance India�s nuclear tests in 1999.
Any perspective on the NSA�s operations in Sri Lanka has to take into
account the fact that the US had developed a �substantial intrastructure
facility� in the Voice of America station on the island�s west coast in
the mid eighties and that similar VOA facilities in other parts of the
globe �also accommodate NSA�s electronic surveillance assets.�
The MI6 is represented in Colombo by the Deputy High Commissioner of the
UK mission. The British Military Intelligence and the MI6 liase with the
NIB also through the second secretary of the mission. The MI6 had its
own station in Colombo headed by an officer holding the rank of first
secretary until 1994. The station has coalesced with the MI6�s regional
station in Jakarta since then.
The British have a mutual defence and intelligence treaty with America.
The UK�s traditional military and intelligence relationship with Sri
Lanka has therefore been beneficial to the US. (Until 1997 the cream of
the Sri Lankan aarmy�s officer corps was trained in UK. All the
commanders of the SLA until Lt. Gen. Sri Lal Weerasooriya were graduates
of the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst, UK.)
It has to be noted here that all the primary security partners of the US
have direct access to Sri Lanka�s intelligence establishment. Officials
from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) station in
Singapore are regularly briefed by the DII in Colombo. The Australian
mission�s Deputy High Commissioner (who actually holds the rank of
second secretary) liases for the ASIO in Colombo.
By focusing on very close military to military and
intelligence-to-intelligence relations with primary security partners
since World War II, the US was able to preserve most of its strategic
interests from being affected by pressures from the political and public
domains of those countries. The US intelligence assets in the UK,
Australia, South Korea, Singapore and Thailand are little or not
accountable to the political establishments of those countries.
For example, the Australian Parliament has no access to the NSA�s
installations in that country (the matter was last raised in 1999) and
the US intelligence priorities in Canadian immigration policies which
were channelled and implemented through the Canadian Security
Intelligence Service (CSIS) were not accountable to that country�s
Parliament until recently.
This has helped the US defence establishment in pursuing its global
strategic interests and goals with little or no interference caused by
changes in the political domain of its primary security partners.
Canadian immigration policy historian Reg Whitaker (author of �Double
Standard�) said that the Canadians let Tamils settle in large numbers
from late eighties in deference to US interests. He asserted that its
was in tune with US strategic motives which the CSIS accepted as
routine.
In developing and cementing close military to military relations with
potential security partners in the neighbourhood of regional powers the
US takes special care not to provoke adverse reactions from the American
public and from the government of the target country. The US aims to
�permeate� the security forces system of the �potential security
partner� to make it eventually malleable, obviating thereby the
political pressure and red tape which usually stymie or delay the
cementing of strategic ties. The �permeating� silently takes place over
the years by gradually increasing joint exercises, training (locally and
in the United States), advice, supply of military equipment, active
intelligence support etc,. The process is specifically aimed at bringing
elite units and intelligence in the army, navy, air force and the Police
within the �fold� � the US military brotherhood.
The Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) and Access and Cross Servicing
Agreement (ACSA) are the US military�s most effective instrument for
cementing the gains of the close relationship developed with a potential
security partner. The SOFA and ACSA constitute the basis for
�flexibility� in projecting US military power into regions where
potential �hegemons� are located. Their �informal nature� draws little
publicity in the region, in the US and in the country with which it is
signed while giving the �key� to the US army to open doors and
�permeate� the host military.
In 1999, US army signed the ACSA with the Philippines and Nepal, both in
regions considered important for current USAF global access strategy �
Western Pacific and South Asia. The US has politically, diplomatically
and economically manoeuvred to exploit specific internal circumstances
in the target country to cement the ACSA or SOFA at the right
conjuncture.
Philippines offers an interesting parallel to Sri Lanka. The USAID set
about developing the particular Mindanao harbour and its surroundings
which were eventually ceded to the US when it signed the ACSA with
Manila. Norway facilitated peace talks between New People�s Army and
Manila which eventually had the effect of reducing the threat of anti US
NPA guerrilla activity around the harbour region in Mindanao. USAID and
Norwegian facilitation had helped pacify the harbour region by the time
ACSA was signed.
Relations between the US and the Philippines reached their nadir in the
mid 1990s following the closure of the Subic Bay base. The US military
had several points of leverage to re-establish a close institutionalised
relationship with the Philippines. The Philippine military was under
constant pressure from the Islamic militancy in Mindanao, which was
being covertly funded by Saudi Arabia, a US military ally. US Special
Forces training and joint exercises aimed at honing and modernizing the
Philippine army�s counter insurgency capability were therefore welcome.
The traditional links between the two militaries made the process
smooth, culminating in the ACSA. Economic and diplomatic instruments
were also deployed to cajole the political establishment of the country
for a consensus on the treaty.
The US would complete its strategic positioning in the Subcontinent once
it signs the SOFA or ACSA with Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Maldives.
The �management� of the ethnic conflict, among other things, is
also important for the US to �sufficiently� expand and consolidate
its military and intelligence relations with Sri Lanka as an
important security partner in the region. The escalation of the war
between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers has
offered the US Pacific Command a wide range of opportunities to do
so.
The structure of the Sri Lanka army and its war doctrine underwent
remodelling along the lines of the US military since relations started
to expand from 1993. The emphasis on the greater role of airpower in the
SLA war doctrine has largely been due to US input and assistance.
Special training programs for the SLAF by the USAF have focused on
developing strategic airpower as opposed to a counter insurgency related
tactical air fighter fleet.
This witting or unwitting shift of emphasis on airpower in the Sri
Lanka�s war doctrine in 2000-2001 increased the need to enhance its
facilities.
In this context it is interesting to note what a US DoD study says of
potential security partners such as Sri Lanka. �In the near term, access
strategy for Asia should centre on increasing opportunities for
deployments and exercises and on the development of contingency
agreements with a number of potential security partners in the area.
Depending on the closeness of the resulting relationship, this could
include measures to tailor local infrastructure to USAF operations by
extending runways, improving air traffic control facilities, repairing
parking aprons and the like.�
A USAF team has already carried out at least two preliminary surveys of
basing facilities in the island. Met some members of the team for lunch
at DA�s residence in February 2001. Questioning was largely about LTTE�s
ability to attack Palaly, India�s response if LTTE were to overrun the
base.
A member of the team who was introduced only as Mr. Smith (no rank) is
currently working with the US de-mining group in Jaffna called RONCO.
Smith is alleged to have liased with local journalists questioning about
a) whether LTTE is planning to instigate refugees at some point to enter
high security zones in Jaffna, mainly the Palaly-KKS region. b) How
serious is LTTE infiltration in settlements allowed near HSZ periphery
c) What is LTTE�s political cadre strength in army controlled areas of
Jaffna.
Stabilizing the Sri Lanka state was considered critical for the US at
this juncture to consolidate and cement its strategic interests here.
The LTTE was a stubborn impediment to achieving this end � particularly
the constant threat to Trincomalee and Palaly.
Containing the Liberation Tigers and making them more malleable were
also identified as priorities.
A CIA regional analyst in Washington said in July 2001:
�containing the LTTE while stepping up pressure on the civilian
population under its control by stepping up �terror� bombing might create
conditions for unseating Prabhararan�.
In April 2001, the DIA obtained an End User Licence of an LTTE arms shipment
through its Indonesian counterpart. The document was traced to Bulgaria. The DIA
spoke to the Bulgarians, got a history of earlier dealings, and stopped further
sales. This, according to DIA chief in Colombo, was expected to turn the screws
on the LTTE to negotiate.
However, both US and British intelligence �specialists� regret that
gaining any kind of direct leverage on the LTTE seems impossible. Several US
directed actions in the home territories of America�s main security partners to
turn the screws on LTTE operations there did not secure the expected response.
|
Interventions by US Government Officials |
US says LTTE transitional
government not recognized, 24 June 2008 |
Time for Colombo to defeat LTTE with
political solution: U.S. Ambassador Blake, 24 October 2008 |
Politics not my cup of tea says US
Ambassador Blake - Really?, 25 May 2008 |
United States Role
in Sri Lanka Peace Process 2002-2006, Jeffrey Lunstead, 15 May 2007 |
"Sri Lanka has in President Rajapakse a
strong leader" - U.S. Ambassador Robert Blake, 1 March 2007 |
Sri Lanka's Momentum - Remarks at the
Galle Face Hotel, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Richard A. Boucher, Assistant Secretary
for South and Central Asian Affairs , 20 October 2006 |
Richard Boucher, US Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian
Affairs on EU Ban & Peace Process, 1 June 2006 |
US Under Secretary of Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, Press Briefing,
Colombo, 23 January 2006 |
United States Ambassador to Sri
Lanka, Jeffrey Lunstead: The Return of the Ugly American?
, 11 January 2006 |
Sri Lanka Presidential Elections, US
State Department & Reason, 22 November 2005 |
Sri Lanka�s Peace Efforts: The View
from a Distance - Teresita C. Schaffer, July 2005 |
US Stand on Sri
Lanka's Conflict
- E. Ashley Wills, United
States Ambassador to Sri Lanka, 7 March 2001 -
"...If anyone in this audience has contact with the
LTTE leadership, please convey two messages from the U.S. Govemment: A:
if the LTTE is still fighting for Tamil Eelam, please accept that that
goal cannot be achieved; and, B: if the LTTE really cares about the
Tamil people and about assuring their rights, giving up violence and
negotiating are the way to go.." and Response:
Nadesan Satyendra on Ambassador E. Ashley Willis & the US Stand on Sri
Lanka's Conflict, 14 August 2004
|
US Under Secretary
of State, Thomas R. Pickering
Press Conference, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 29 May 2000
"..The U.S. has long supported
the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. As I have said in
both India and Pakistan, the U.S. does not envision or support
the establishment of another independent state on this island,
nor do we believe other members of the international community
would support it. We continue to urge all parties to the
conflict to
negotiate a peaceful resolution of this country's ethnic
conflict... I think that while it is easy to dismiss
diplomatic statements by governments as not having an effect, we
are beginning to see, in fact, that it does have an effect.
... When you speak of
military aid, that usually means gifts of military equipment.
What did come up was the government's interest in military
equipment purchases, which are normally done in the United
States through manufacturing companies and a government
licensing process. And that was discussed... "
|
Interventions by US
legislators |
US Senators call for
ceasefire and international oversight of detention camps 13 March 2009 |
US Congressmen urge increased US efforts in Sri Lanka 3 July 2007
"...Fifty Congressmen and women in a letter to US
President, urged him "to increase U.S. diplomatic engagement and
high-level political contact in Sri Lanka to work toward achieving a
lasting peace." They also urged the President to "increase U.S. efforts
to promote strong human rights protections for civilians, urge the
Government of Sri Lanka to take active measures to end extrajudicial
killings and disappearances in government-controlled areas, [and]
enhance Treasury Department efforts to disrupt LTTE financing."
|
US Congressmen
call on President Bush to appoint Special Envoy to Sri Lanka, 31 January
2007 |
US Congressman Frank Pallone
advocates autonomy for Tamils, 27 September 2006 |
US
Congressional Caucus on Sri Lanka Introduces Resolution in the US
House of Representatives, 9 February 2006
Comment by tamilnation.org
Frank Pallone, Jr, founder and co-chair of the
Congressional Caucus on Sri Lanka, introduced a resolution on 9
February 2006 in the US House of Representatives. The text of the
introduced resolution appears below. The words of Arundhati Roy in
Instant-Mix Imperial Democracy (Buy One, Get One Free)
come to mind - "..Way back in 1988, on the 3rd of July, the U.S.S.
Vincennes, a missile cruiser stationed in the Persian Gulf, accidentally
shot down an Iranian airliner and killed 290 civilian passengers. George
Bush the First, who was at the time on his presidential campaign, was
asked to comment on the incident. He said quite subtly, "I will never
apologize for the United States. I don't care what the facts are." I
don't care what the facts are. What a perfect maxim for the New
American Empire. Perhaps a slight variation on the theme would be more
apposite: The facts can be whatever we want them to be...""]
|
Congressmen Bernard Gilman,
Brad Sherman & Sherrod Brown, 30 October 2000
"..We write to urge you to register your concern with
the Government of Sri Lanka regarding the
brutal
murder of twenty-four Tamil prisoners
inside the Bindunuwewa, Sri Lanka detention center on October
25, 2000...Unfortunately,
incidents such as these are not isolated occurrences in Sri Lanka..."
|
Congressman Brad Sherman, 1 September 2000
"....The United States has an opportunity make Sri Lanka a
model and help it to evolve, by negotiating,
two autonomous democratic political structures within a system
acceptable to both parties, where ethnic communities can coexist
peacefully on the Island. The US should be firm in its message to the
government and the opposition, that if negotiations are not forthcoming
immediately, they should be prepared to conduct a referendum of the
Tamil people in Sri Lanka..."
|
Congressman Sherrod Brown, 11 August
2000
"..Despite their financial and military
superiority, the government of Sri Lanka has not been able to contain
the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). On innumerable occasions,
the LTTE has demonstrated the ability to launch hit-and-run attacks from
the northern jungles, and
have succeeded in reversing government gains on the battlefield...
Sri
Lankan authorities have implemented an oppressive press-censorship
policy and
have
not allowed essential supplies, including baby food and medicine, to be
distributed in these regions. Such abuses of human rights will not
stop until a resolution to the conflict is found..."
|
Congressman Benjamin A. Gilman, 29
June 2000 and 30 August 2000
"..The Tamil Tigers are well positioned
to soon retake Jaffna...The
process of negotiations
begun by Norway could begin to move forward due to the Tigers likelihood
of taking over Jaffna. ...The Norwegians have the agreement of all
concerned parties to help begin negotiations and Norwegian diplomats
have made several visits to both India and Sri Lanka.
The U.S. should make it clear that we would support all options
including secession to be discussed in the negotiating process. If
all preconditions are lifted then all the parties could get on with the
process of resolving their differences..."
|
U.S. Congressman Edolphus
Towns in the United States Congress on October 2, 1998
"..Currently, there are 17 freedom movements within
India's borders. India's break up is inevitable...It has been American
policy to preserve the current artificial stability in South Asia, but
let us remember that we pursued a similar policy with regard to the
Soviet empire and it collapsed anyway. The best way to preserve
stability, democracy, prosperity, freedom, and peace in South Asia is to
get on the side of the peaceful, democratic, non violent freedom
movements in Khalistan, Kashmir, Nagaland, and the other nations living
under Indian rule..."
|
US
Congress Resolution on Sri Lanka 18 September 1995
and Jaffna University Teachers to US
State Department, 21 November 1995 |
US Congress
International Relations Subcommittee for Asia and the Pacific, -
Statement of Christina Rocca, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asian
Affairs on Sri Lanka, June 2005 |
The
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Urges Financial Boycott of Sri Lanka, 9
June 1983
"The Massachusetts House of Representatives
unanimously adopted a Resolution filed Representative Marie E. Howe
(D-Somerville) and the Eelam Tamil Association of America, headquartered
in Somerville, Massachusetts, urging the divestment and withdrawal of
public funds and pension revenues from businesses that are owned by
organizations based in Sri Lanka.
In filing this Resolution on behalf of the Eelam
Tamils, Representative Howe stated, "it is urgent that the citizens of
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are made aware of the gross violation
of human rights by the Government of Sri Lanka, formerly known as
Ceylon, against the Tamil population. Government sponsored terrorism
against the minority people of this Island just south of India will not
be tolerated and hopefully the citizens of Massachusetts will boycott
all products and companies with interest based in Sri Lanka."
|
Proclamation by Mayor of
Somerville, Sister City of Trincomalee, Eelam (Naval Base, 22 June 1981
"..The harbor of Trincomalee is one of the wonders of
nature and is a strategic area in the Indian Ocean; and Trincomalee had
been a purely Tamil area along with Jaffna, Mannar, Vavunia, Batticaloa
and Ampara, until the administrative fusion with the Sinhalese country;
and The Tamils of the island had been there from time immemorial.."
|
Resolution of US
Massachusetts House of Representatives Calling for the Restoration of the
Separate Sovereign State of Tamil Eelam, June 1981
Comment
by
tamilnation.org,
20 March 2007
-
The Resolution passed by
the Massachusetts House of Representatives
on 18 June 1981 (more than twenty five years ago) makes it abundantly
clear that the United States is not without an understanding of the
justice of the Tamil Eelam struggle for freedom. What then has
changed in the ensuing 25 years? Not much, if we recognise that
countries do not have permanent friends but have permanent interests.
Not much, if we recognise that the interests of a state are a function
of the interests of groups which wield power within that state and
'foreign policy is the external manifestation of domestic institutions,
ideologies and other attributes of the polity'.
more
|
Human Rights for
Tamils in Sri Lanka - Hon. Mario Baggio of New York in the US
House of Representatives, 8 May 1980
"We strongly believe that the
situation in Sri Lanka merits the special attention of the
President. Under terms of this resolution, the Congress
calls on the President to immediately:
Encourage the Government of Sri Lanka to
declare its intentions to withdraw troops from the Tamil areas
of Sri Lanka in a phased and orderly manner; and
Reaffirm U.S. Government support for full
restoration of human rights as a means of promoting
self-determination for the Tamils. "
more
|
Proclamation of Eelam Day by
Edward J.King, Governor of Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 16 May
1979
WHEREAS: The Tamils of Eelam live as
an
oppressed
minority in Sri Lanka: and
WHEREAS: From ancient times Sri Lanka
has had two nations. The Sinhalese and the Tamils with distinct
languages, religions. cultures and clearly demarcated geographic
territories: and
WHEREAS: In 1948 the two nations were
left under a unitary governmental structure: ...
more
|
Interventions by Tamils in USA |
Blake starring in BLAKE-7
, 1 June 2007 |
Closing The Barn After The Horses
Had Bolted - Professor Aaron
Rajah, 15 April 2007
Comment
by tamilnation.org:
Professor Aaron Rajah is right to ask the question: "So why does Mr. Boucher
came out of the wood work and insist on an international team investigation of
the human rights abuse while playing ball with Sri Lanka for almost a year? ".
There are those who may wonder whether the answer may have to be found in
something that
Dharmeratnam Sivaram attributed to a CIA
regional analyst in July 2001 "containing the LTTE while stepping up
pressure on the civilian population under its control by stepping up �terror�
bombing might create conditions for unseating Prabaharan."
|
Ambassador Blake Vs US State Department (Round One):Professor Aaron
Rajah, 7 March 2007
Comment by tamilnation.org
Professor Aaron Rajah is right to point out
the discrepancies between Ambassador Blake's pronouncements and the Reports
by the United States Department. Having said that, we ourselves are reminded
of something that Sri Lanka Information Minister Ananda Tissa De Alwis
said in a press
briefing on the 30th of May 1984, some 22 years ago -
"It was not possible for Government
Ministers to speak with one voice on this problem. It is not strictly
possible. The Government however speaks in one voice but expressed views
in different shades."
And President Jayawardene in Hongkong was
equally frank on 7 June 1984. Questioned about the different speeches made
by Prime Minister Premadasa and his National Security Minister
Athulathmudali he cheerfully replied:
"They both represent government
policy...They are both members of the government and the speeches they
make reflect government policy...No Minister speaks outside government
policy".
We believe that if Ambassador Blake was
saying anything which contradicted US policy in relation to the
conflict in the island he would have been recalled - many months ago. We as
a people may need to examine the
underlying US policy
which is reflected by the statements of both the US State Department
and Ambassador Blake.
|
American Tamils call for Recognition of Tamil Sovereignty,
26 February 2007
".... Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed. ...whenever any Form of Government
becomes destructive of
these ends, it is the
Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new
Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its
powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
Safety and Happiness..."
The Unanimous
Declaration, of the Thirteen United States of America
In Congress, 4 July 1776
|
Sri Lanka�s Ambassador
to the US & the US Foreign Service Institute - Sanmuga Suntharam,
14 February 2006 |
An Open letter to the US
Ambassador to Sri Lanka - Professor Aaron Rajah, 12 January 2007
"While you claim 25 years of terrorism has gone anywhere,
you fail to mention that
25 years of power sharing attempts and non implementation of accords by
the successful racist Sinhala government did not go anywhere either..."
|
An open letter to Congressman Frank
Pallone - Professor Aaron Rajah, 19 October 2006
Comment by
tamilnation.org:
The words of Congressman Pallone reminds us yet again of something that
Arundhati Roy said some three years ago: "..Way back in 1988, on the 3rd of
July, the U.S.S. Vincennes, a missile cruiser stationed in the Persian Gulf,
accidentally shot down an Iranian airliner and killed 290 civilian
passengers. George Bush the First, who was at the time on his presidential
campaign, was asked to comment on the incident. He said quite subtly, "I
will never apologize for the United States. I don't care what the facts
are." I don't care what the facts are. What a perfect maxim for the New
American Empire. Perhaps a slight variation on the theme would be more
apposite: The facts can be whatever we want them to
be..."
Instant-Mix Imperial
Democracy (Buy One, Get One Free)
|
Appeal to US Secretary of State -
Dr. Muthuvel Chelliah, Columbia, MD., 2 June 2006
Comment by
tamilnation.org. "Dr Chelliah's
sentiments are clearly heartfelt. But the harsh reality is the dilemma
which he points out in his concluding remarks: 'We (the US) truly don't care
for human rights and democracy in the world; we just use it as a tool to
further our foreign policy agenda. Should I say to my children that? Are we
that way? I hope not. So sad.'
What should I say to my children? What
indeed - if we are to maintain our self image of honest and humane parents
concerned to educate our children to be honest and humane and take pride in
the country to which they belong. There may be a need for all Tamils to
truly understand
the pillars of US foreign policy so that they may question the
underlying premises and then respond in an effective and meaningful way to
the challenges that the Tamils face as a people."
|
US Tamils call for stop to
extra-judicial killings by Sri Lanka, 29 May 2006 |
Ilankai Thamil Sangam to US Ambassador
Lunstead, 20 January 2006 |
Tamil Americans urge
Co-chairs to promote "equal partnership for peace�, 3 January 2005 |
Dr.Rajan Sriskandarajah to Ariya
Rubasinghe, Director of Government Information, Sri Lanka, 3 June 2001
"..Thank you for your Press Release (# 475) of 26th May
2001, which your embassy was kind enough to send to me...I am impressed by
the thoughtfulness of your embassy staff for taking the trouble to send this
to someone who has long relinquished the citizenship of your country.
Certainly Doctor Goebbels, whose tasks were similar to yours in Nazi
Germany, would never have sent something like this to a Jewish person living
in Germany or elsewhere.."
|
Ramalingam Shanmugalingam to US Secetrary of State, 5 May 2001
"Peace Dialogue in Sri Lanka Wanted? -
Then the US should stop arming and training Sri Lankan forces..."
|
Dr.Rajan
Sriskandarajah, Human Rights in Sri Lanka - a Power Point Presentation, 29
April 2001 |
Ramalingam Shanmugalingam,
Sri Lanka's Tamils & The International
Community, 25 July 2000
- Presentation before The World Affairs Council, North County Coastal Forum |
War In Sri Lanka: Power Point Slide Presentation by the Action Group of Tamils
in the US (AGOTUS) before Benjamin A.Gilman, Chairman, US Congress
Committee of International Relations, June 2000 |
Ramalingam
Shanmugalingam ,June 2000 |
|
|