Editorial

20th February 2000

Here we go again

The Norwegian Foreign Minister was accorded an unusually uneventful reception, quite in contrast to the reception accorded to the late Rajiv Gandhi who was also here on a third party mission to solve Sri Lanka's crisis in 1987.

Probably the Norwegian envoy's visit was not on the same scale as Gandhi's dramatic foray to neighbouring territory to sign an accord that was hatched in secrecy and incubated in darkness. Though Mr. Vollebaek's visit is also in the nature of a third party initiative, at the moment his foray over here can be seen as a mere preliminary exploratory visit.

The visit comes at a time when there is grudging acceptance perhaps that people in general are tired of this conflict. They have realized that the war is a stalemate that will not bring military victory to either the Sri Lankan forces or the LTTE. The Sri Lankan Army may be hamstrung by political interference and such, but causative factors notwithstanding, the forces don't appear to be able to win this contest. Keeping the war afloat is good business for too many.

Too much of blood has been shed as a result of this protracted war, and the nation is bleeding as a result of it. All this probably has led to some sort of acceptance of the notion that a third party necessarily has to bring the protagonists together in resolving this crisis.

But the fact that it is Norway that has been picked as the third party to accomplish this task, necessarily gives rise to some amount of scepticism or doubt. Those who are enamoured with Norway's role in this kind of conflict resolution cite Norway's role in bringing together the Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Israelis — archetypal foes — to the negotiating table. But now in retrospect, it is evident that the United States and not Norway became the third party after the accord was signed on the White House lawn after the initial talks.

Norway's links with the LTTE are clear and discernible, and when we at The Sunday Times exposed the connection two years ago, the Norwegians got all hot under the collar and were seen to bend over backwards to please the LTTE.

On the other hand, it is Norway that the LTTE trusts. Internationally, however, the world is moving steadily towards isolating terrorist organisations and this is being accomplished via instruments such as the UN protocol on child soldiers, on land mines and on terrorism.

Notwithstanding all that, can we imagine a situation in which LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran gives up his cry for a separate state and sets up shop as a Chief Minister or a private citizen? In this context, isn't it worthwhile pondering the hidden mala fides in Anton Balasingham's apparent agreement to talk for the fourth time since the LTTE started its separatist campaign? Third party facilitation may be inevitable at this juncture, but, the state needs to approach the situation carefully, and not forget lessons that were learnt through experiences of negotiations in the past.

The people also while looking positively at the latest trend, need to be alert and cautious because the LTTE in a bid to start bargaining from a position of strength is likely to carry out attacks such as the current spate of bus bombs. Both the government and all the people who want this conflict to end need to be more aware of the ground realities that rather than be lulled into a state of complacency, vigilance is the need of the hour, for an escalation of violence during peace talks is only to be expected.

We are also glad that all-party talks are taking place to reach a consensus on constitutional reforms with crucial negotiations scheduled for Tuesday between President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Opposition UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe. But the process might again get bogged down as it has been during the past six years over the linking of the abolition of the executive presidency with the devolution proposals. As we have done before, we again urge the government to reconsider its position — de-link the two issues in the best interest of all.

The Political Column

Editorial/ Opinion Contents