Spin doctoring is a difficult art as governments at home and abroad have discovered much to their embarrassment. A spin doctor, euphemistically called a government or ministerial spokesman, one might get away now and then with verbal camouflages and tangential arguments. But such moments are temporary.

Here in the UK it was only a couple of months ago that the government spokesmen ensconced in their Downing Street press office committed their latest faux pas, denying the prime minister's wife Cherie Blair had any financial dealings with a convicted fraud who was due to be sent off from here to Australia, very much like in the old days when the British shipped criminals Down Under.

When the story gathered momentum and Tony Blair's spin doctors ended up with so much egg in the face that they could have made a Spanish omelette with it, they blamed the media for it.

I was reminded of the Downing Street fiasco on reading the statement issued by the Colombo government's spokesman on the controversy and confusion surrounding some radio equipment for the LTTE.

It is not easy for every one, especially the faint hearted, to put his foot in his or her mouth. Such physical nimbleness does not come easy.

How hard it must then be to put both feet in one's mouth as the government spokesman has done. Instead of the verbal dexterity and argumentative deviousness he perhaps expected to display to a sceptical and confused public he ends up without a leg to stand, both his feet being in the mouth.

One might applaud the government's spokesman for his anatomical contortions. But one can hardly do the same for his attempts to explain away the government's dubious role in its game of footsie with the LTTE.

Last Sunday this newspaper published the government statement in full along with comments by its Diplomatic Correspondent.

Despite this there is ample justification for returning to the subject, though I dare say it will take more than one Sunday column to deal with all the implications especially as the spokesman has conveniently clouded some issues with the usual smoke screen.
To change metaphorical gear, the spokesman or whoever drafted this reply after a lapse of some months- does remind me of the Foreign Ministry's long vow of silence surrounding changes in our diplomatic missions-has done what the squid does in times of perceived danger. It darkens the water around it hoping the inky blackness would create an escape route.

The statement is intended to clarify "concerns expressed in the media about the circumstances in which a license was issued to the LTTE Peace Secretariat to operate a private radio transmission in the Wanni".

This is surely false. It is not merely the media that has expressed concerns. While it is true that the media broke the story, the attempt to show the public that only a handful of rabble-rousers in the media are pursuing this issue is argumentative sleight of hand. It is known that sections of the opposition and Sri Lankan public have raised the issue. It is also known that the Indian Government has officially voiced its concern giving an external dimension to the issue.

Therefore to engage in mindless damage control by trying to limit the concerns to sections of the media is a falsehood.

Moreover the concern is not merely over the granting of a license but the whole episode such as the operating of another radio station, the real purpose of satellite communication equipment, which is unaccounted for and was not examined by the communications experts and the peculiar involvement of the Norwegian Embassy.

The statement says that "a specific request was made by the LTTE on October 18". Is it then to be understood that there were general requests for radio equipment made earlier than that? No, because if there is proof of an approach earlier, the statement would not have pinpointed October 18 which is extremely damaging to the government's case and its attempts to portray the LTTE as a law abiding organisation.By the government's own admission, the equipment purchased in Singapore was carried on board the vessel MV Kota Tegop which was due in Colombo on October 17.

So the "specific request" by the LTTE was made on October 18 a day after the cargo had already arrived or was due to in Colombo. In short the equipment had been purchased and shipped from Singapore even before the LTTE made its "specific request".

This means either that the LTTE had been made aware before hand that such equipment would be allowed into Sri Lanka or that despite the government's attempts to paint the organisation in lily white dress as a law abiding group now, the LTTE still operating at the periphery of the law at best, ready was confident of getting the equipment.

It is hard to believe that the LTTE would have gone through the process of buying-if indeed it bought-and then despatching it by sea if it had any doubts on its ultimately destination.

In the same breath the statement says the list of equipment was "also made known to the Government. The equipment purchased and to be imported, was reported as….".

When was this? Was the list of equipment made available when the LTTE first made its "specific request" to the Ministry of Mass Communication on October 18?

If so how can the government speak of equipment purchased and "to be imported" when the cargo was presumably already in Colombo, though it had not immediately been cleared.

The reasons adduced by the LTTE in applying for the radio licence were that certain parts of the north-east suffer from poor radio reception, that there is a need to keep the people there educated and informed of the peace process and this FM radio station is for the benefit of the people of the north and east.

Laudable objectives no doubt, particularly when the LTTE's application states thus: "You will undoubtedly agree with me, a well informed public is a precondition for the consolidation of peace efforts by all of us".

Indeed it is. But unfortunately the LTTE's reputation about free speech and media and a well- informed public belies its stated intentions. It has in various ways deterred even Tamils who wish to express a contrary or different opinion from its own, by physically attacking journalists, destroying their newspapers and intimidating news agents from selling them. This has happened in local areas controlled by them as well as abroad where substantial Tamil communities exist.

It appears that the Mass Communication ministry has swallowed the story altogether and even ignored asking the LTTE why it is applying for a licence when the equipment has already reached Colombo.

The licence issued is to operate a station at Kilinochchi covering an area with a radius of 20 kilometres. If one then draws a circle with Kilinochchi as its centre and a 20 kilometre radius from there, how far into the eastern province would the radio transmissions penetrate? Would the Tamils, Muslims and Sinhalese in Batticaloa and further south in the eastern province benefit from these transmissions? Or are the Tamils and others in the east to be discriminated against once more by the northern Tamils who have traditionally looked down upon the eastern province Tamils and continue to do so while protesting at discrimination?

The government claims that by applying for a licence, the LTTE has for the first time brought its radio transmissions under the country's laws.

Really? Is the government telling us that the Voice of the Tigers operating clandestinely all these years has now been stilled, that the LTTE has suddenly developed a respect for the law?

If the Voice of Tigers still operates- and according to the head of the LTTE's Arts and Cultural Section Puthuvai Ratnathurai, its transmissions will be expanded to cover Southern India and Singapore (the external dimensions)- why does the LTTE need another radio station with a very much narrower reach?

Why didn't the government ask the LTTE to legalise the Voice of Tigers instead of providing a licence for another voice but same content.

So the claim that the LTTE has accepted the country's laws will be a hollow boast if it is permitted to operate two stations- one within and one outside the law.

Back to Top

Back to Columns

Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.
Webmaster