-
The Following is a Letter from SCOPP Secretary General Rajiva Wijesinha to the International Herald Tribune Regarding the Proposed Visit to Sri Lanka of Charu Hogg
Posted on March 18th, 2009 No comments20 August 2007
The Editor
International Herald TribuneDear Sir,
The IHT.com article by Charu Hogg regarding the Human Rights situation in Sri Lanka makes interesting reading, though the mixture of fact and fiction perhaps justifies Ms Hogg’s arriving here on a tourist visa to complete her research in this field.
Though datelined August 15th, the article does not take into account the refutations of salient points in her report which I sent to Brad Adams, the Director of the institute for which she works. I had for instance challenged the assertions of the sensationalistic press release that accompanied the release of the report, which alleged indiscriminate attacks which led to displacement, after which ‘Government authorities have forced some to return to areas that remain insecure’.
As I noted then, the release ignored the substance of the report which relates the current situation according to the UNHCR spokesperson who said that ‘Our staff monitoring the situation on the ground say the majority of people are eager to return home, the returns are voluntary and in line with international protection standards …. UNHCR will continue to monitor the returns and report directly to the government on any problems regarding the voluntariness and any deviation from the civilian characteristics of the move’. (p 32)
Again, the claim of indiscriminate attacks is strange given that the report only records one, as to which the government had explained at the time that its radar showed that mortars had been launched from a refugee camp, ie it was not indiscriminate at all. Of course I cannot claim for certain that the government was correct, but one such incident in a campaign in which very few civilian lives were lost does not justify Ms Hogg’s extravagant claims, and suggests a greater care about civilians than is common in countries to which Ms Hogg owes allegiance. I would have more respect for her if similar language were used about much greater assaults on individual lives and liberties by other countries engaged in wars against terrorism.
But the excesses of her account are not my point here. Even Human Rights researchers have to live, and without exaggerations they may not be taken seriously in an increasingly dangerous world. Much more serious is the congruence of her recommendations with those of the LTTE and also the main opposition party, both of which dream of getting rid of the duly elected government – elected not only at the Presidential election of 2005 but also at the Parliamentary election of 2004.
How does one get rid of an elected government? One is by winning over members of Parliament. The opposition UNP has done this twice before so far, once in 1964 when the current leader’s father presided over a massive bribery operation, and again in 2001 when once again there were allegations of bribery.
But in both cases there were members of Parliament who felt genuinely that the government was failing, and therefore they crossed over to the opposition. This precipitated an election which the opposition won, though in both instances not especially convincingly, and in both cases only to be trounced at the next election.
To convince parliamentarians that the party through which they were elected is a disaster, you have to work extra hard. In 1964 there were allegations that communists were taking over the government, in 2001 the task was simpler since a terrorist assault on the airport reduced confidence considerably and contributed to negative growth of the economy.
Hence the terrorism that the LTTE has threatened, in making clear its intention of attacking not only military but also economic targets. Of a piece with this is the opposition UNP’s attempt to prevent the government raising bonds by threatening not to repay them if it returns to power. It assumes this will happen soon because, according to sympathetic media, Saturn has moved.
Saturn’s movements may be as good a way of predicting events as any other, but what is sad is to see some members of the international community also falling in with the plans of a terrorist organization and an opposition leadership that has been convincingly trounced in elections twice in the recent past. Now, sadly, both feel that, by presenting Sri Lanka as a failed state, and requiring that it be nannied by others, they will once more be able to topple an elected government.
Whilst we are grateful to those who draw attention to particular violations of human rights, and believe the government has an obligation to take action to deal with perpetrators and prevent repetition, the relentless generalizations culminating in calls for a particular agenda will only promote the cause of undemocratic terrorism at this juncture. It is easy for Ms Hogg, in her London retreat, to pontificate, but could she live amongst our Tamil fellow citizens who have now got to offer one member of each family to the relentless LTTE war machine, if she had been present when Tamil groups not associated with the LTTE were decimated on the last occasion the LTTE and the UNP worked together, she would think twice about what she is trying to achieve.
Yours sincerely,
Rajiva Wijesinha, Secretary General,
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process -
HRW’s Dirty War and the Clean Record of the Sri Lankan Army
Posted on March 18th, 2009 No commentsBy Prof Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary General
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Processin Sri LankaSCOPP Report
08 August 2007Amongst the more outrageous statements of the Human Rights Watch in its recent statement headlined ‘Sri Lanka: Government Abuses Intensify’ was the claim that “The Sri Lankan government has apparently given its security forces a green light to use ‘dirty war’ tactics”. This was said by Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. The release claims that ‘President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his brother, Defense Secretary Gothabaya Rajapaksa, have pursued military operations in the country’s north and east , with little regard for the security of the civilian population… Security forces have subjected civilians to indiscriminate attacks’.
Astonishingly, the body of the report carries hardly any substantiation of the latter claim. There is just over a page (along with an illustration of an IDP) in the Summary subtitled ‘Abuses during armed conflict’ which begins ‘Some of the most serious international law violations have taken place during armed hostilities, when civilians have died in unlawful attacks and others were displaced. Both the government and the LTTE have shown a brazen disregard for the well-being of non-combatants’.
There is then a paragraph regarding the attack on the Kathiravelli School which was an IDP camp. The rest of the section is about IDPs, including the statement ‘The LTTE has at times blocked civilians from leaving areas of conflict’. No other instance is given of ‘indiscriminate attacks’ in the course of ‘military operations’.
Whilst the Kathiravelli incident needs to be considered further, what HRW has failed to register, and what is almost unique in the history of this type of military operation, is the paucity of civilian casualties. Western nations involved in what they characterize as anti-terror operations all over the world seem to have been less cautious in their approach to civilians, judging from the number of casualties reported over the last year in say Afghanistan or Iraq or Israel. Whether HRW has engaged in crude denunciations of the leaders of the countries involved may perhaps be of interest to those governments who may be influenced by the HRW recommendations.
What they should also be interested in is the manner in which the Sri Lankan armed forces conducted themselves throughout the operation in the east. There were hardly any civilians casualties, as is borne out by the reports of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission. Furthermore, there have been no allegations whatsoever of rape which, as Mr Adams will know from even the recent sentencing by the US army, is difficult to avoid even for armies he will doubtless consider disciplined and discriminating in their attacks on civilians.
With regard to Kathiravelli, which is the only actual incident cited in the whole HRW report about civilian casualties during the military operations in the east, the death of so many civilians must be deplored. It is necessary however to examine all the facts, even as cited in the HRW Report, before responsibility is decided upon.
On the morning of November 8th the LTTE had fired at the Sri Lankan army from the Kathiravelli area, and, according to D B S Jeyaraj, five soldiers and a civilian were wounded and one soldier killed. The army fired back in the late morning, hitting the school though under the impression, because of ‘mortar locating radar’ that it was hitting LTTE gun positions.
HRW claims that, according to its eyewitness accounts, ‘while the LTTE was frequently milling about the area, no LTTE fighters were located in or adjacent to the IDP camp at the time of the attack or directly before’.
However, HRW also notes that ‘The LTTE had sentries in the area of the camp, ostensibly to monitor the movement of displaced persons’. A man in the camp added that ‘In the daytime, the LTTE didn’t carry weapons….When the LTTE has heavy weapons, they don’t show them because they’re afraid someone will inform.’ Another woman added ‘that about 15 LTTE fighters stayed in some huts about 6000 metres from the school. “They had rifles but no heavy guns,” she said.’ The report also notes the many bunkers in the school grounds but says that the displaced persons dug bunkers so as to ‘protect their families from government shelling’.
Whilst this last phenomenon may seem only strange, the conclusion is inescapable that there were at least at some times LTTE members with heavy weapons in the camp. This does not in any way justify the killing of civilians but, combined with the initiation of an artillery attack, and what would probably have been the radar discovery of weapons, the shelling of the camp is understandable.
The consequent deaths of civilians was a tragedy that every Sri Lankan should mourn. It should also be noted however that no similar incident has occurred after that. Recently, the Peace Secretariat looked into what the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization alleged were several violations of the CFA, and requested the SLMM too to provide reports. The TRO reported an incident of 11 July 2007 and then listed five other incidents over the preceding fifteen months in only two of which was loss of life reported. One of these was Kathiravelli, where the figure of deaths given is less than that alleged by HRW.
All lost of life is to be deplored, civilian or military, and it is for that reason that SCOPP hopes that the LTTE will return to negotiations. But statistics indicate that the Sri Lankan forces have been far more careful about civilians than many governments which HRW does not seem inclined to criticize with the same personal intensity. The fact that it is only the Kathiravelli incident that HRW can cite in its blanket personal attack on the conduct of military operations seems a tribute to the Sri Lankan forces. Though the record of the government in the eighties was unsatisfactory, and contributed much to the anguish of minorities, the increasing concern of both government and forces for the civilians of all communities they are meant to protect has been increasing apace in recent years. This must continue, but perhaps HRW should suggest that the training programmes conducted by the forces in this respect, which have produced such remarkable improvement, be shared with countries with much worse records – assuming HRW has the guts to identify them.
Prof Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary General
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process -
Human Rights Watch Report Contradictory and Misleading – Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP) in Sri Lanka
Posted on March 18th, 2009 No commentsAugust 7, 2007
The Human Rights Watch report on Sri Lanka is misleading and rife with contradictions and could be used by organizations like the LTTE and others that seek support to disrupt democratically elected governments like that of Sri Lanka, SCOPP Secretary General Rajiva Wijesinha said in a letter to the U.S. based human rights group.Prof. Wjesinha accused Human Rights Watch of being selective in its release in concentrating criticism on the human rights record of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa.
“Your report is a repetition of the unequivocal criticism of the current Sri Lanka government, that is grist to the mill of not only the LTTE but also others in Sri Lanka who deplore the results of democratic elections and hope instead that agencies like yours will help to disrupt the government,” Prof. Wijesinha said in a letter to Brad Adams, Director of the Asia Division of Human Rights Watch.
The assertion that there has been a dramatic increase in abuses by the government during the past 18 months is designed to imply that the Rajapaksa government has misbehaved from the time it was elected. But that assertion is contradicted in other paragraphs in the release itself as well as in the full report, the Secretary General declared.
Referring to the report’s assertion that government authorities have forced some to return to areas that remain insecure, the SCOPP Secretary General said: “The selectivity of the report is most depressing and ignores the current situation.”
In fact in the report itself, allegations of forced returns of people are attributed to a single interview with a single humanitarian worker. The report omits the current situation, where UNCHR staff monitoring the situation reported that a majority of the people are eager to return home, the returns are voluntary and in line with international standards, Professor Wijesinha said.



