Our backyard is not for alien landings
Henry Kissinger, former U.S. Secretary of Sate was asked about who or what American aerial bombs should target in Cambodia. Kissinger said: "Everything that moves.'' Kissinger is paraded on TV by the major U.S networks currently, at the time when the new Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is laying out her strategies for U. S foreign policy.

If Kissinger was in the dock for war crimes, it may have been very easy to prove his guilt and it could have been done sans any arduous court-room process. Slobodan Milosevic who is now being tried for war crimes, for instance, never made such a sweeping statement as the one made by Kissinger, pointed out one prominent international affairs analyst recently. ("Bomb everything that moves.'')

Kissinger is the current elder -steersman of American foreign policy, which fact should leave at least some impression in the readers mind about the direction in which American global design is veering. In this backdrop, some readers who have written to me about recent columns in this space, seem to be dangerously misinformed and naïve about the big picture of global realpolitik.

In the melee there have been passionate calls to "externalise'' Sri Lanka's conflict --- for instance, to welcome all non governmental organisations because of a perceived strategic advantage accruing from such a move. Enter Bill Clinton, the proposed new crisis mediator in Sri Lanka.

When Kaushalyan, an LTTE political leader of the Eastern province was eliminated last week, local analysts were not sure how to react. Were they to gloat, or were they to wag their fingers in condemnation??

The killing of Kaushalyan appears to be the further extension of the post tsunami foreign policy of 'externalising'' the Sri Lankan conflict. There is historical proof that internecine warfare and factional blood-letting is the warmest welcome that can be given to external elements by way of an invitation to intervene in Sri Lankan affairs, but it's not seen that way immediately. By the way, for the new generation of foreign policy wonks, what better television footage than a Norwegian woman giving the final opinion on the Kaushalayan's assassination, with a nuanced opinion on whether it was a ceasefire violation or not??

But it's not enough that we have the SLMM. Some advocate that we dig in deeper, and that we go the whole hog and invite the NGOs to display their wares and set up camp, and also extend that invitation to all foreign troops, forgetting about whether they are in a lighter or darker shade of tan because they are all in the end in camouflage, and that's what matters. These are all friends, it is argued, who would marginalise the LTTE.

A theoretical coup d'etat, if not for one nagging question: With friends who import helicopters as presents for the LTTE, who needs enemies?? Those who argue for the externalisation of the Sri Lankan conflict as part of a post-tsunami grand strategic design, pivot their argument around twin hatreds: hatred for the LTTE and hatred for the JVP.

This column at least does not think it is necessary to sugar-coat its preferences for the internal scoundrel as opposed to the external one. "We'd rather prefer the LTTE to the Americans, period,'' was my contention some weeks back - - - - and it's a contention well worth repetition in the atmosphere of Clintonesque foreign policy that we are about to be bequeathed after the tsunami. Post tsunami foreign policy seems to be the piece de resistance of the new fangled foreign policy advocacy groups who throw globalisation at internal squabbles. It's a throwback to a past in which it was reasoned that the best way to get rid of the Dutch was to invite the Portuguese.

The current rationale is that the best route to get rid of the externally propped-up LTTE to is to invite external forces. Countless Muslim countries have had a variation of this theme, which is: "If Shi’ites are fighting the Sunnis, call the Americans.'' Tariq Ali in his book ''Clash of fundamentalisms'' documents with an urbane charm, the utter folly of Islamic nations which fell into this externalisation-trap.

Externalization is however the Aspirin way out of a crisis. It sure acts fast - and spells temporary relief. The argument goes that a substantial external presence in the island will act as a deterrent to the LTTE which is roughly the same as Iraqis saying that as long as Americans are here, we can have elections.

In a recent survey cited by Chomsky, it has been shown that only 1 per cent of the Iraqis think Americans have brought democracy to their country. So much then for the most touted benefits of externalisation.

The JVP and the LTTE together represent the most committed elements among the younger generation of the politically active in this country. Why call upon the Americans or any other foreign presence to deracinate these two groups which to many represent ideals of commitment and dedication - - albeit very often gone horribly awry?

The non governmental organisations on the other hand represent the exact other face of this coin. NGOs represent commitment to anything but the people, and often their audits have also shown an extraordinary dedication - - to lining their own pockets.

A call for an NGO presence to neutralise the LTTE and the JVP is therefore like chasing your fruit punch with arrack -- - - the deployment of a greater evil to dilute a lesser one.

Furthermore it presupposes that we cannot handle internal conflicts on our own. Getting the Norwegians to mediate negotiations and monitor a ceasefire agreement is one thing, but to call for a permanent external presence of assorted NGOs and international smooth-operators here to underwrite an arrangement that will keep the Tigers quiet, is a form of pandering that's, to say the very least, unbecoming for an independent nation state. We may have sold our souls in terms of a cultural sell-out a la Coca Colanization and CNN, but to call for a physical presence of aliens just so that we can be safe from the LTTE - its sounds so much to me like a system designed in a place called Langley, Virginia.
Ask any spy near you -- that's where some very spooky people are headquartered.

Back to Top

Back to Columns

Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.