You are on page 1of 11


The Game Behind alleged Lankan war Crimes


Ideological influence of Human Rights then seeks to dictate the destiny of these people and nations. Not just jeopardizing the Future butThe issue of Human rights as an objective truism becomes then the first casualty.

Let us then revise the successive developments of this Lankan war and alleged
War crimes as it evolved acted upon by the various Influences. Particularly understand Ideological influence and the Geo-political interest groups which then in its turn exploited each other seeking their own mutual outcomes, instead of any genuine focus on promoting humanism.

UN Human Rights Council 11th session

UN Human Rights Council vote on resolution A/HRC/S-11/L.1/Rev.2. Blue represents support (29), red represents opposition (12) and yellow represents abstention (6).

In May 2009 17 countries (Argentina, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, France, Germany, Italy, Mauritius, Mexico, Netherlands, Slovenia, Slovakia, South Korea, Switzerland, Ukraine, Uruguay, and the United Kingdom) attempted to get the 11th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to investigate war crimes in Sri Lanka. They put forward a resolution that deplored abuses by both the Sri Lankan government forces and the Tamil Tigers, urged the government to co-operate fully with humanitarian organizations and to provide protection to civilians and displaced persons, and made an appeal to the Sri Lankan government to respect media freedom and investigate attacks against journalists and human rights defenders.[33] This was thwarted after the Sri Lankan government received support from China, Russia, India and developing countries.[34]

The UNHRC instead passed resolution A/HRC/S-11/L.1/Rev.2 on 27 May 2009 which commended the Sri Lankan government's actions, condemned the Tamil Tigers and ignored allegations of violations of human rights and humanitarian law by government forces.[35] This resolution was passed by 29 votes to 12 votes with 6 abstentions.[36]

Note that the original draft of the resolution had no mention of any call for international investigation of any war crimes by Lankan regime. It merely shares out the blame on abuses by both sides during the war. Then it talked of post war cooperation with agencies and called for more freedom for human rights groups and critical media to operate freely. Though that Resolution draft was thwarted and the final Resolution passed was that of commending the Lankan regime for its conduct of War and condemnation of the Liberation Tigers for its violations of Human rights. This acknowledgement of war crimes on part of the Liberation theological movement meant a reversal for its ideologues. At another level- this also alarmed the Remnants of this particular liberation movement overseas already suffering the legal curtailment as a terrorist organization, a grim prospect of a possible Lankan drive towards prosecutions for their contribution to the movement. Promptly- the ideologically aligned Human Rights groups started countering this as followsSince this was about the Liberation Tigers and a cause clbre of global Liberation theological movement and its future, it doesnt surprise us that the first salvo towards lifting of ban on the LTTE should come from a move at Rome.

The Permanent Peoples' Tribunal is international opinion tribunal that was founded in Bologna (Italy) June 24, 1979 at the initiative of Senator Lelio Basso.[1] The tribunal stated that the crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government against the Tamil Tigers could not be justified because "neither war crimes, nor crimes against humanity would be justified by any act committed by the victims".[61] The tribunal found that the USA and UK undermined the ceasefire by pressurizing the EU into designating the Tamil Tigers as a terrorist organization. This allowed the Sri Lankan government to restart the war and thus commit the human rights violations.[61]

That is an awesome leap of logic that isto state that the proven acts of terror by a political movement should have been ignored by world nations and human rights are better served by its good health and the deterrence its free existence offers to its state antagonist. Now that we learn from this Peoples Tribunal the real wise move by EU and western nations would have been in not declaring the LTTE as an international terrorist organization, it should be not hard to guess that its Revival and lifting of the ban on LTTE would be a step in the right direction? When we read its conclusions on Lankan conflict we are not surprised to find the genesis of this now ubiquitous label in circulation that is now tagged quite freely to LankaGenocide. The tribunal knows such tags of slurs will stick obstinately, but knows well enough that it is such an absurd choice of term regarding Lankan war since the casualty figures dont even add up to characterize it as an ethnic cleansing even if such assumptions are made. Not to forget fact that most Tamils lived at Sinhala regions throughout the decades long civil war and continue to do so. So it first brandishes a list of horrific things about Lanka and carefully acknowledges that this doesnt constitute a genocide butThe tribunal could not find enough evidence to justify the charge of genocide but it requested that a thorough investigation be held as some of the evidence it had received indicated "possible acts of genocide Since it is already a given that LTTE (not Tamils) are the victims it turns the reason upside downThe tribunal could also not find enough evidence to justify the charge of crimes against the peace.[61] The tribunal stated that the crimes committed by the Sri Lankan government against the Tamil Tigers could not be justified because "neither war crimes, nor crimes against humanity would be justified by any act committed by the victims".[61] So it seems- the same logic cant be extended to the victims of LTTE. Actually this Peoples Tribunal is justifying the war crimes and crimes against humanity by the LTTE though it says such crimes cannot be justified by the acts of its victims. That is Liberation dialectics for you.

The tribunal made a number of recommendations to the Sri Lankan government, UN and international community, including that a UN special rapporteur be appointed to "investigate and identify responsibilities for human rights violations, violations of humanitarian law and war crimes committed by all parties in conflict. The left and liberal media chipped in with its sound bites and kept elaborating along this line of revival of the Liberation theologys struggle.

UN Panel
United Nations Expert Panel on Sri Lanka is an advisory panel created to advise UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon on the issue of accountability with regard to alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law during final stages of the conflict in Sri Lanka. Its mandate is consultative and not binding to Sri Lanka. The Panel has been denied entry into Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan government. The Expert Panel consists of Yasmin Sooka, Marzuki Darusman, and Steven Ratner. Ms. Sooka is a former Commissoner on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. Mr. Marzuki was the Attorney General of the Republic of Indonesia for the period 1999 to 2001. He has a member of the National Commission of Human Rights in Indonesia and has participated on two UN fact finding missions. Prof Steven Ratner is the Bruno Simma Collegiate Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. The panel was first appointed in June 22, 2010. It began its work in Sep 2010. Call for submission from the general public was made on middle of Oct 2010. The dead line for submissions is Dec 15, 2010. The panels four month mandate ends in the middle of middle of Jan 2011.

Darusman was born in Bogor, West Java, in 1945.[1] The son of Suryono Darusman, a diplomat, he spent much of his childhood in Europe; this later influenced his thoughts on social norms and equality,[2][3] as Darusman found the class differences present in Indonesia disturbing. Now to that disturbing Marxist angst of Class struggle let us see where he gets schooledIn 1974 he graduated from law school at Parahyangan Catholic University in Bandung.[

In criminal law, Darusman was instrumental in removing former Chief of the Armed Forces Wiranto from his cabinet position, later bringing Wiranto to trial for alleged human rights violations in East Timor and several military members to trial for issues in Aceh.
Yasmin Sooka mulls over this question of credibility in her Dealing with the past and transitional

justice: building peace through accountability

A pertinent example is provided by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where a truth commission has been established against the backdrop of ongoing violent conflict and under pressure from peace brokers. The commission itself has members who are associated with warring parties and, as such, do not qualify as impartial, and it is hampered by the fact that the conflict does not permit it to engage in any meaningful activity. Under these circumstances, can Such a commission function with credibility?

We also are pondering over that same question- of a Panel constituted of well meaning but ardent advocates with clear sympathetic views and ideological affiliations be any more credible?
Another phenomenon that is experienced mostly in Africa is what I term the space ship parachuting in to rescue the local community without understanding the context or the dynamics in which they are operating. Once the institution has come and gone, local actors are left to deal with the negative consequences. This is not meant to denigrate or diminish the contribution of the international community, but should rather serve as a caution to ensure that national institutions and actors are integrated into any process

We wish she had read this above lines she had written and believed herself, for the UN Panel is just one meddlesome spaceship.

All the energies of the Tamil Diaspora were diverted to orchestrate this charade.

The ongoing rebuilding efforts of the long civil war devastated Lank took a back seat. Very little help was rendered to this crucial question of the future.

The future of the Tamils at Lanka was slowly becoming captive to a dead past and becoming synonymous with a Future for Liberation theology there. If we read carefully we will notice that stress various forces working upon a projected destiny. The Tamil Diaspora and the remnants of the LTTE network seeking a revival along ethnic separatism. The Liberation theological ideologues keeping alive the Cause of liberation. The previously mentioned forces of geo-political power blocks seeking estrangement or alignment of Lanka and India by working upon this Tamils issue. The Ideologically invested Human Rights groups prioritizing their own readings from such rendering of the conflict- who do not possess objectivity, neutrality or even really care about human rights. Their expected results werent late in its comingFirst the LTTE remnants assuming faces of innocuous Fronts declare the thrust of their vision of future. Father Immanuel would step in as the Head of the Global Tamil Forum and pick up the mantle of leading this global movement along Liberation theology. Justice and Liberation. To the Australian media he would be introducedBooks he has written on the plight of the Tamil people include Let My People Go which has been translated into English, French, German and Tamil. Fr Emmanuel said he had been radicalized by his experiences in Sri Lanka.

Grass root organisations form Global Tamil Forum

[TamilNet, Thursday, 23 July 2009, 23:57 GMT]

A number of grass root Tamil organisations across the world on Thursday launched an initiative in forming Global Tamil Forum (GTF) said Suren Surendran of British Tamil Forum, which is one of the constituent organisations of the Forum. The Tamil diaspora is united in restoring the sovereignty of Eezham Tamils in their homeland and bring the perpetrators of crimes against humanity to justice, Mr. Surendran told TamilNet. The Forum will work for the benefit of Eelam Tamils based on the principles of the Vaddukkoaddai Resolution that recognises SelfDetermination of Eezham Tamils in creating an independent and sovereign Tamil Eelam in the traditional homeland of Eezham Tamils in the island of Sri Lanka, said Dr. Sampavi Parimalanathan, a diaspora activist in Australia.

THE IMPACT AT UN HRC These moves by Liberation theological elements would rope in other influential activists among Human Rights circles. The resolution of UN HRC would now be acted upon to course correct towards the stated objectives of Liberation theology.

Justice first, as a prelude to Liberation. To connect the dots we now must go far to Haiti where a mere church activist priest would enounce his frocks and swiftly climb on to become the head of the government. When he would decades later stand accused of Human Rights violations and crimes against humanity, we will see who helps him out as his special counsel.
Jean Aristide (born 15 July 1953) is a Haitian former Catholic priest of the Salesian order and politician who served as Haiti's first democratically elected president.[1][2] A proponent of liberation theology,[3][4] Aristide was appointed to a parish in Port-au-Prince in 1982 after completing his studies. He became a focal point for the pro-democracy movement first under Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier and then under the military transition regime which followed. He won the Haitian general election, 1990-1991 with 67% of the vote and was briefly President of Haiti, until a September 1991 military coup. The coup regime collapsed in 1994 under US pressure and threat of force (Operation Uphold Democracy) after Aristide agreed to roll back several reforms. Aristide was then President again from 1994 to 1996 and from 2001 to 2004. However, Aristide was ousted in a 29 February 2004 coup d'tat, in which one of his former soldiers participated. He accused the United States of orchestrating the coup d'tat against him with support from Jamaican Prime Minister P. J. Patterson and among others.[5] Aristide was later forced into exile in the Central African Republic[5] and South Africa. He finally returned to Haiti on 18 March 2011 after seven years in exile.[6]

Accusations of violations of human rights-

An exponent of liberation theology, Aristide denounced Duvalier's regime in one of his earliest sermons. This did not go unnoticed by the regime's top echelons. Under pressure, the provincial delegate of the Salesian Order sent Aristide into three years of exile in Montreal.[10] By 1985, as popular opposition to Duvalier's regime grew, Aristide was back preaching in Haiti. His Easter Week sermon, "A Call to Holiness," delivered at the cathedral of Port-au-Prince and later broadcast throughout Haiti, proclaimed, "The path of those Haitians who reject the regime is the path of righteousness and love."[13] Aristide became a leading figure in the ""ti legliz movement"" Kreyl for "little church."[14] In September 1985, he was appointed to St. Jean Bosco church, in a poor neighborhood in Port-auPrince. Struck by the absence of young people in the church, Aristide began to organize youth, sponsoring weekly youth masses.[15] He founded an orphanage for urban street children in 1986 called Lafanmi Selavi [Family is Life].[16]:214 Its program sought to be a model of participatory democracy for the children it served
Subsequently, Salesian officials ordered Aristide to leave Haiti, but tens of thousands of Haitians protested, blocking his access to the airport.[22] In December 1988, Aristide was expelled from his Salesian order.[23] A statement prepared in Rome called the priest's political activities an "incitement to hatred and violence," out of line with his role as a clergyman.[24] Aristide appealed the decision, saying: "The crime of which I stand accused is the crime of preaching food for all men and women."[25] In a January 1988 interview, he said "The solution is revolution, first in the spirit of the gospel; Jesus could not accept people going hungry. It is a conflict between classes, rich and poor. My role is to preach and organize...."[7] In 1994, Aristide left priesthood, ending years of tension with the church over his criticism of its hierarchy and his espousal of liberation theology.[26] The following year, Aristide married Mildred Trouillot, with whom he had two daughters. Human Rights Watch accused the Haitian police force under President Aristide and his political supporters of attacks on opposition rallies. They also said that the emergence of armed rebel groups seeking to overthrow Aristide reflected "the failure of the country's democratic institutions and procedures".[

The problem with the liberal media and the human rights industry was that he also happened to be a Liberation theologist turned Ultra leftist despotHis two terms at office running Haiti witnessed gross violations of human rights including the practicing neck lacing of political opponents. This particular way of gruesome execution of rival factions and opponents could be seen to have been done by the other liberation theological rebel group LTTE. The rival rebel group fighters and its leaders were garlanded with burning tires and burnt alive

But with Aristide the same appalling brutality would be white washedVideos surfaced showing a portion of a speech by Aristide on 27 August 1991 where he says "Don't hesitate to give him what he deserves. What a beautiful tool! What a beautiful instrument! What a beautiful piece of equipment! It's beautiful, yes it's beautiful, it's cute, it's pretty, it has a good smell, wherever you go you want to inhale it."[111] Critics allege that he was endorsing the practice of "necklacing" opposition activists placing a gasoline-soaked tire around a person's neck and setting the tire ablaze[112] However, just earlier in the speech, and edited from the videos, he is quoted as saying "Your tool in hand, your instrument in hand, your constitution in hand! Don't hesitate to give him what he deserves. Your equipment in hand, your trowel in hand, your pencil in hand, your Constitution in hand, don't hesitate to give him what he deserves."[111] There is some suspicion that Aristide's speech was edited to make it sound as if he were advocating "necklacing" when he was actually urging his supporters not to use violence but to use the constitution and voting instead.[113]

Such astonishing apologia and attempt to exonerate a corrupt fascist head of state regarding the brutality of his regime cannot be understood unless we remember that he was also a spearhead of Liberation theology. It is enough if we highlight this sympathy towards Liberation theological leaders and movements runs high among the three Panelists that Advised UN General secretaryRatner served as a special counsel to Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, assisting in the prosecution of human rights] crimes.

Strange isnt it? The human rights activist lawyer who actually filed cases against his own country while it fought global terrorIn 2006 he filed a criminal complaint in the courts of Germany requesting the criminal prosecution of US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and other US officials for the abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib prison. Ratner sued the George H. W. Bush administration to try to stop the Gulf War, the Clinton administration to try to stop the strategic bombing during the Kosovo War, and he won a case on behalf of victims of the Bosnian Serb leader, Radovan Karadi, for war crimes.

Strange but consistent only when we make the connection of a not dissimilar regimes head at not very dissimilar tight spot happening to be on the same side of his sympathies.

At once Human Rights begins to be pursued with lines redrawn ideologically. That Aristide was a Liberation theologist and gets defended with legal counsel for crimes and human rights violations by Stephen Ratner. And the fact that Liberation tigers were ideologically a movement that was inspired and put up by the very same global Liberation theology movement. The Expert panel has expertise indeed defending such Liberation theological movements and its leaders. Not only was the Panel constituted with such Experts at defenders of Liberation theological movements, but such an expertise would also be required when we see that the earlier resolutions of UNHRC were not only critical of the vanquished Liberation Tigers but largely had no problem with going along with the Lankan regimes conduct of that war and its measures for reconciliation. That such an ending would signal the clear defeat and leaving behind of the liberation theological movement. Geopolitical conflicts of interest then steps in and creates a meddle to lead subsequent reading of the Lankan war and the valuable lessons of its history into a chess game of politics pushing nations to fall into spheres of Power blocks. Human Rights then is no longer based on any objective Reality but subjected to the subjective ideological orientations of the players involved, not so involved and yet to be involved- marginalizing those directly involved. Whom all these ideological manipulations and maneuvering of interest groups steer into expected taking up of positions proceeding from such ideological dictations. This Ideological influence of Human Rights then seeks to dictate the destiny of these people and nations. The issue of Human rights as an objective truism becomes then the first casualty.