The
true figure of speech
About this time last year, these very columns pointed out for the
first time, that the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had
defined new contours in Sri Lanka's foreign policy.
Not
that the UNP Governments of the past have not chartered such territories
to abandon the non-aligned nations and the ranks of the poor to
win special favours for the country and her suffering people from
the powerful West.
We
referred to this " bold if brazen" stance that would have
secured his Government brownie points with the US, but made the
country look a turncoat state in the eyes of others.
This
week, President Chandrika Kumaratunga did the honours at the UN
General Assembly in New York. Taking the podium she spelt out her
Government's foreign policy, which was, understandably, bringing
Sri Lanka more on track with the rest of the world, rather than
the US lobby.
On
Iraq, she played it safe saying " We are deeply saddened at
the violence...in Iraq " etc., and on the hot topic of international
terrorism, she said that "security measures " a euphemism
for military solutions, are always not the solution, and that one
has to look into the causes for terrorism as well.
That
sits well with the anti-US hatred in mainly the Arab world, which
has much sympathy in Africa, Latin America and Asia, but cuts thin
ice when it comes to local terrorism waged by the LTTE. Such a pronouncement
will be welcomed by the pacifists and surely be frowned on by the
Nationalist elements, in equal measure.
But
the bombshell in the President's address was not exactly what she
said, but what she is supposed to have not said.The confusion starts
with the President's Press Office, which sports the high-falutin
nomenclature, the Policy Research and Information/Media Unit. They
released two different speeches of the President to the local media.
The latter they referred to as the 'revised version'.
In
that second version, the President omitted reference to the Norwegians
as peace brokers, and supposedly included some tough rhetoric about
the LTTE. Ex-facie, these exclusions and inclusions, are no big
deal to a nation that has had its overdose of such 'rhetoric' -
theme songs sung with different tunes at different times and places.
On
the other hand, if the President did deliver to the UNGA, the same
speech she actually delivered to the local media eventually then
she is fully entitled to make revisions before she takes the podium.
Giving her the benefit of the doubt, she probably waited for the
UN Secretary-General's speech to add a few paras, and needed to
keep her speech trim to avoid the 'red light' that comes on when
speakers over-step the strict time-limit imposed on them. And probably
too, she wanted to curtail her address to terrorism in the macro-sense,
rather than the issue at home. And nobody at the President's Policy
Research and Information/Media Unit (Press Office) was at hand in
Colombo to clear the doubts for days.
The
one question that arises is whether speeches at such important forums
should be actually done on-the-run, so to say. That was what happened
to the former Premier as well. In that case there were too many
cooks that spoilt the broth. This time, it was bureacractic bungling
at the Press Office. Some jinx, all the time, it seems.
Bridge
of dialogue
One of the highlights of this week's opening sessions
of the 59th United Nations General Assembly was arguably, not a
speech made, but a letter written. We refer to the letter by the
new anti-war socialist Prime Minister of Spain Jose Luis Rodriguez
Zapatero to the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan where he calls for
the UN leadership to make a thorough search of the causes of the
escalating animosity between the West, especially the US and the
Muslim world.
Identifying
areas for this clash of civilizations, Mr. Zapatero calls for an
Alliance of Civilizations to reconcile the West and the Muslim world.
He has called for a multilateral diplomatic process to discuss political
and cultural issues on this front.
Actually,
the Spanish initiative is only an echo of a similar call from Iranian
President Mohammed Khatami (please see our Special Report article
on the subject on page.11), but the UN is unable to escape the grip
of US influence; Iran is a bad boy, Islamic and therefore rejected.
The European Union has also launched a Euro-Mediterranean partnership
on these lines.
There
are fears that behind the veil of the global war on terror, there
is a secret agenda for globalization where the economically poor
must rubber-stamp Western roadmaps. On the broader canvas of things,
despite all the millions of words spoken and to be spoken at the
UN during this on-going sessions, the world is drifting to a more
dangerous plane.
There
is no better organisation today, than the UN, albeit all its deficiencies,
to adopt the Spanish-Iranian-EU initiatives. |