Columns

Who runs the British Government? Is it the prime minister and the elected representatives of the Conservative Party or nondescript groups of minority refugees and extremists with dubious and violent backgrounds whose highly raucous demonstrations have scared the British authorities to cave into their demands? But it is good to remember that what seems is not always what is in reality.

Over in Sri Lanka the yahapalana government proudly claimed it had won over the west and re-established cordial bilateral relations with the western bloc after the ‘disastrous years’ of the Rajapaksa administration. In the early years of yahapalana rule its leading lights made “Westward Ho” their theme song as they took wing to Washington and London and any other western capital that would accept what seemed their constant passages for public penance.

Just recently President Sirisena prided himself on the excellent relations his government had developed with the international community only to be struck down by the British and humiliated possibly by our own foreign ministry. This current story is woven round the independence day incident in London which cost Brigadier Priyanka Fernando, Sri Lanka’s Minister Counsellor (Defence) his posting and caused High Commissioner Amari Wijewardene to end her contract on March 31, on “her own volition” according to the foreign ministry which is still to say when the original contract officially ends. After all she assumed duties on August 10, 2016 by her own admission as stated in her confidential fax letter to Foreign Secretary Kariyawasam.

Whether the post of high commissioner UK is jinxed in modern times as some seem to think or not, I don’t really know. But the most recent two official heads of mission seem to have fallen by the wayside. Behind all this are some shady goings on, more so with the British Government playing a Jekyll and Hyde game intent on covering up its double dealing diplomacy.

I cannot quite recall right now which native Indian Chief – Geronimo or Cochise – reportedly said “white man have forked tongue”. If the European–American invaders of native Indian territory in America had one forked tongue, how many more of those appendages would the British have for twisting, turning and distorting history from colonial times to the present day.

It was during the Nuremburg war crimes trials (or was it at the Tokyo trials?) that one of the accused axis leaders repeated a saying that is quite often quoted. “History,” he said, “is written by the victor.” That is why some books on British colonial history present imperial Britain as a benevolent ruler that brought ‘civilisation’ to backward and uncultured parts of Asia, Africa and Latin America.

The British write their own history and infuse those doctored accounts of events into the educational systems of the countries they subjugate. Those who have not dug deep into Britain’s disgraceful past as a colonial ruler might well accept the British interpretation of events of today, as well hooked as they are by the distorted and concocted histories. So when our leaders and their official bag-carriers go on bended knee to pay homage to their tinselled gods in the west who then turn round on their one-time subjects, it takes our leaders to unravel the volte face.

The triumphalist attitude of the Tamil lobby in the UK following its successful lobbying of the British Government to have Brigadier Fernando ousted from his post and the Theresa May administration caving in to satisfy Tamil demands in the on-going tussle to win over its voter base, might appear a bit premature. One Tamil diaspora group that played a major role in what might well turn out to be a drama of many sub plots is the Global Tamil Forum (GTF) whose leader Dr. S.J. Emmanuel was feted in Sri Lanka sometime last year.

The GTF paid back the yahapalana government when its spokesman Suren Surenderan urged the British to cancel the visas of Brigadier Fernando’s wife and family and send them home as well. If this is a grand gesture of the GTF to show other Tamil groups it has some teeth left and score some points over the rest it might have become the victim of the usual British diplomatic game of playing both sides against the middle.

It is not only the battle of Waterloo that was won on the playing fields of Eton. Lying to one’s own parliament and cheating the people is more than a British parlour game. A couple of days ago I read a comment by the British High Commission in Colombo in response to a media query about this Hyde Park Garden hullabaloo. With typical diplomatic reticence the British High Commission said “The Sri Lanka Government is currently carrying out consultations with those involved in the incident that took place outside the Sri Lanka High Commission in London on February 4. It would not be appropriate for the UK to comment on or take further action regarding the incident until the Sri Lanka Government has completed its investigations”. That was a neat trick. Having yielded to the Tamil diaspora initially at the turn of events, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) played out the first few overs to satisfy the vociferous demonstrators who had desecrated Sri Lanka’s national flag and displayed Prabhakaran’s image and LTTE insignia in violation of the UK’s own Terrorist Act which prohibits such public displays of items depicting foreign organisations banned as terrorist groups.

What is worrying is that the British Government has taken as gospel truth the story spun by the Tamil lobby that the Brigadier’s gesture amounted to a death threat when other interpretations were available and nobody else seemed to have been questioned or consulted on his. Acting on that interpretation of the gesture the FCO did what even angels would have feared to do. It had High Commissioner James Dauris read the riot act to Sri Lanka to take prompt action and throw the brigadier to the wolves, or should one say tigers, a depleting breed environmentalists tell us.

One wonders what would have happened had we a less docile government and a more aggressive one that would not go down on all fours each time some waning western power said “sit Rover”. Let Britain not forget that it is fast losing friends in Europe and elsewhere and a Brexit mish-mash is not going to bring countries rushing to establish friendly ties with Westminster which has little to offer as foreign banks and major companies wish the City of London goodbye.

Some 30 years ago President Premadasa showed a meddling British High Commissioner David Gladstone who is boss by declaring him PNG and sending him home. Gladstone released a book on his ventures a couple of months back. I’m sure he had much to say about his Sri Lanka adventure. Unfortunately I still have not been able to get myself a copy of it.

Another former British HC Dominic Chilcott had a close call after his Dudley Senanayake memorial oration when he tried to practice his “new diplomacy” and felt he was acting within the boundaries of this diplomacy making highly critical remarks about his host country. I remember writing two columns on Chilcott’s shenanigans which led to him contacting me in London saying he would be spending a few days there on his way to Washington and could we meet. We did over a drink and had a long chat.

There were many calls on the government to send him off too. But this was almost his valedictory speech since he was due to leave shortly for Washington as numero duo of the British embassy. Anyway one might say he had a close call. But now that we are being accustomed to docile diplomacy and unnecessary obsequiousness which makes one wonder who is being served by our officialdom as State Minister of Foreign Affairs Vasantha Senanayake quite interestingly observed, there is little likelihood of foreign diplomats and others suffering from the indignity of being asked to pack up and go.

While publicly presenting a tough exterior which would have had some in the Tamil diaspora applauding enthusiastically the FCO let a few weeks pass before giving signs of its two-sided diplomacy played against the middle.

In its statement to the newspaper the British High Commission said that Sri Lanka is “currently carrying out consultations with those involved in the incident” referring to the February 4 matter. ‘Those involved’ obviously must include those who first raised a ruckus with a demonstration and made rude gestures that were insulting to a nation celebrating its independence.

What the British High Commission does not say is how the Sri Lanka Government can be having consultations with those involved when some of those involved publicly acknowledged their leader was a banned terrorist and their country Eelam was a figment of some peoples’ imagination. This is one way of dragging things on until they are long forgotten. One wonders whether Minister Faizer Musthapha had attended a class or two of British procrastination.

It would indeed be nice if the British high commission could say how such consultation could be constructed to elicit evidence, not the kind of worthless rhetoric that passers-by usually hear. This is Britain’s way of trying to bury the hatchet. Enterprising observers might well recommend a more useful place in which to bury the hatchet if they really put their minds to it.