France, colonised by the Germans during World War II has had a great commitment to people who are refugees. Many Frenchmen and women were refugees themselves during those war years and the post-war generation opened the doors of France to all peoples who were refugees.
"Liberte; Egalite; Fraternite" - Liberty; Equality; Fraternity (Brotherhood) is France's famous national motto. It had its problems with Algeria because of its occupation of that country, but even so, its doors were open to a large number of African immigrants from French-speaking Africa and many (old) countries of West Asia (the Middle East) where French was the second language.
In the 1970s it was the French who provided asylum - and succour to an Iranian cleric, the Ayatollah Khomeini who organised a people's revolution back in his country which eventually overthrew the pro-West Shah of Iran and established a theocratic state. In the 1980s France opened its doors to Sri Lankan immigrants, many of whom took advantage thereafter of the 1983 racial riots in Colombo and elsewhere to pour into that country. Many were 'economic migrants' looking for a better life on the back of what they called 'ethnic discrimination' in Sri Lanka, and soon, Paris became the European headquarters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) organization from where it began issuing statements to the world media on alleged atrocities 'back home'. Repeated requests to close the LTTE offices were met with rebuffs calling for evidence of terrorist activity or the violation of French law by these people.
But all that has changed now in France. The influx of immigrants over the years has reached such a point that not only has it taken its toll on the economy, but the indigenous population has begun to complain about the 'foreign' population in the country. Muslim ladies wearing the burqa and headscarf have become such a cause of controversy that legislators have decided to ban it from schools and the public.
All lip service to human rights was also cast to the wind when a gypsy population of 'Romas' (mainly inhabitants of neighbouring East Europe) was recently expelled in the face of a grumble from their own Foreign Minister and condemnation from the European Union (EU) which was later watered down to a caution.
Now, France has turned full circle; it is rejecting a EU ban on the LTTE, imposed in 2006 in the immediate aftermath of the terrorists' assassination of the then Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, by permitting a little known French town to erect a statue of one-time LTTE combatant and later political head, S.P. Thamilchelvam. Mind you, the rebel leader was an active member of the LTTE at the time of Mr. Kadirgamar's assassination.
The French Embassy in Colombo gave its Government's official position on the issue this week. It admits that the LTTE is a terrorist organization banned by the EU member-states, including France of course and that the initiative for the statue project came from the Franco-Tamil Associations at La Courneuve. The statue was unveiled on November 1 in front of the Art Gallery in the town and Municipal Councillors in the district participated in the ceremony. The area is heavily populated with Sri Lankan immigrants who have obtained voting rights in France. This explains the Councillors bending backwards to please them.
Then came the French Government's justification for this act. It stated the obvious; "Any person, group or organization on the French territory has to respect French law". The question is; has the French Government and these Municipal Councillors as well as the association named, respected French law, not the letter, but the spirit of the law.
The LTTE is a banned organization in France by virtue of the EU ban of 2006. It was banned for not only murdering Mr. Kadirgamar but for using terrorism to further its political goals. This included murdering innocent people. The statue is of a person who was a frontline member of that terrorist organisation until he was killed by the security forces.
The statement then points to the French Constitution which refers to the decentralized federal structure and says that the French Government has no authority over the powers devolved to the local councils, "as long as they are in accordance with the law".
By this argument, the French Government could have banned the LTTE, but it is a worthless ban if any Municipal Council flouts the national - and European - ban because of its devolved powers. Tomorrow they can erect a statue of Velupillai Prabhakaran; they can open an LTTE office for all they care. Does not the writ of the all-powerful EU run to La Courneuve? Can La Courneuve offer GSP+ facilities then to Sri Lanka? This is the kind of western hypocrisy that gets the goat of the rest of the world. It is such dangerous arguments that ought to warn Sri Lankans about the dangers of federalism and devolution.
That said about western hyperbole, it seems the protest letter sent by Sri Lanka's ambassador ended up in the waste bin of whatever office. The Sri Lankan Government's clout in the west is simply non-existent now, and we continue to pay the price for adopting what is perceived as an anti-west foreign policy line. Last month, Sri Lanka's External Affairs Minister who went to London for a lecture ended up getting lectured by his British counterpart with hardly any retort from him.
Now, Sri Lanka cannot even stop the erection of a statue of an ex-Sri Lankan terrorist in a little town in the west.
On the other hand, if the Government in Colombo was so hot and bothered about the erection of this statue of an ex-Sri Lankan terrorist, it is also worth reminding it, for it has surely not forgotten, about the statue commissioned by the Cabinet of Ministers no less, of the late Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar.
It was the then Foreign Minister who waged a relentless diplomatic onslaught against the influential LTTE diaspora lobby in the west, and upon his murder, his energetic officials at the time were able to convince the EU to ban the LTTE.
The French have trotted out a cock-and-bull excuse to justify a blatantly unfriendly act towards Sri Lanka by allowing this statue of a member belonging to an organisation that was engaged in mass murder, including of those from the minority Tamil community, to be erected and remain on French soil. What excuse does the Sri Lankan Government have for not erecting the statue of a man who sacrificed his life for a united Sri Lanka? |
E-mail