Peter's
denial: Tiger by the tale
By our Political Editor
The Sunday Times journalist Tyron Devotta was on
the World Bank's e-mail list for news releases. One day last month
he received a two-page announcement about World Bank support to
Sri Lanka for tsunami recovery. It said total financing needs for
Sri Lanka was estimated to be approximately US $ 1.5 to 1.6 billion.
This
was on the basis of damage and needs assessment conducted by the
World Bank in conjunction with the Asian Development Bank and the
Japan Bank for International Co-operation.
What
struck Devotta most was the final paragraph in the announcement.
It said that the Bank would now be participating with all other
development partners and key stakeholders, "including the Liberation
Tigers of Tamil Eelam, and in close collaboration with the Government
on the development of district-based reconstruction plans for the
affected areas."
Did
the World Bank officially consider the LTTE a "development
partner and key stakeholder"? Was this an official position
of the World Bank since the news release containing the announcement
had originated from Washington D.C.?
To
find answers, like any good journalist would do, he sought an appointment
with Peter Harrold, Country Director for the World Bank in Sri Lanka.
He thought, Harrold being the international lending agency's top
man in Sri Lanka, could explain.
He
had known Harrold and had met him previously during the course of
his journalistic duties. An appointment was fixed for 2.30 pm on
March 4 (Friday) at Harrold's office, just a block away from the
St Andrews' Scots Kirk church in Kollupitiya.
Devotta
began his interview by asking Harrold about "development partners,
stakeholders" and whether there was a shift in World Bank's
policy. He replied there was no such shift but Devotta pushed further.
"You
say the bank will now be participating with all other development
partners and key stakeholders including the LTTE - what does this
mean?" asked Devotta.
Replied
Harrold: " Correct... well, we have always regarded the LTTE
as a key stakeholder. I have often been roasted by various members
of the press and no doubt will again after you print all of this
interview. There are various members of the press and for example
the Patriotic National Movement who have regarded the fact that
we have wished to have conversations with and consultation with
the LTTE as inappropriate. We have regarded...given that there is
such a thing as the LTTE controlled area, an unofficial state and
an officially recognised part of the country as the LTTE controlled
area... given that they are a party to the Ceasefire Agreement with
the Government of Sri Lanka which confers on them a certain status
as a legitimate stakeholder....."
Devotta
had his digital tape recorder running throughout the interview.
An international bureaucrat of the World Bank, Devotta believed,
was someone who was conversant with not only the economic conditions
of Sri Lanka. He also thought was equally consummate with social,
cultural and political realities of the country. With the subject
he interviewed now on tape, Devotta had no reason to doubt any possible
turn or twists.
So
he wrote a front-page news story for The Sunday Times. The crux
of that story was that the World Bank will channel six billion rupees
through state agencies for the re-building of houses in LTTE-controlled
areas but will consult the LTTE on the disbursement of funds. He
backed that story with quotes of what Harrold said. That was from
the tape recording.
As
copies of The Sunday Times hit the streets last Sunday morning,
Harrold's statement infuriated many quarters. Foreign Minister Lakshman
Kadirgamar declared in a statement to the Island newspaper last
Monday "it was a provocative statement." The front page
headline declared 'WB country chief's statement provocative - Kadirgamar'.
This newspaper had devoted almost the entirety of its front page
to developments arising from what The Sunday Times said.
The
Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna said Harrold should immediately withdraw
the statement since it was a threat to Sri Lanka's sovereignty.
The World Bank's assistance to the LTTE, to develop areas under
their control and the Bank's acceptance that the areas come under
an unofficial state must be condemned by all patriotic forces, declared
the Jathika Hela Urumaya.
Tourism
Minister Anura Bandaranaike, whose Ministry is among those receiving
World Bank assistance, lost no time in saying that Harrold's statement
goes beyond the mandate of the World Bank. The former Speaker of
Parliament said his remarks were "unexplainable, obnoxious
and highly provocative."
There
were a plethora of others who mirrored patriotic sentiments though
a few, as usual, were obscured or even blind to reality and what
The Sunday Times says. Placing a smokescreen on the truth, the naked
truth, has become a modern day practice to those lone and muted
voices.
On
Sunday afternoon President Kumaratunga was told of Harrold's statements.
She could not believe Harrold had made such remarks. "Surely,
he could not have said a thing like that," she told an aide.
Yet she wanted the matter gone into.
Harrold
for his part was coming under an avalanche of criticism. He hurriedly
took damage control measures by issuing a two-page news release.
Titled "World Bank Director Misquoted by The Sunday Times:
clarifies position on World Bank Aid to North East Sri Lanka"
Harrold had only two lines about the news report. He said: "I
never used the phrase "a kind of unofficial state." He
added: "A careful review of a recording of the interview shows
that what I said was that "given that there is such a thing
as the LTTE-controlled area."
The
dispute is not over the words "a kind of." It is over
whether Harrold said in his interview about the existence of an
"unofficial state" or not. Harrold claims he said "given
that such a thing as the LTTE controlled area--that's an official
statement, an officially recognised part of the country is the LTTE
controlled area."
A
careful and repeated review of the tape recording shows this is
not what Harrold said. He says quite clearly that .... given that
there is such a thing as the LTTE controlled area, an unofficial
state and an officially recognised part of this country as the LTTE
controlled area...."
Using
his full official weight as the Country Director of the World Bank,
he issued a statement to accuse The Sunday Times of misquoting him.
The gullible who believed what anything a non Sri Lankan says, more
so a westerner, swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The full transcript
of his interview appears on Page 4 and 5. Also appearing on the
same pages is Harold's press release alleging that The Sunday Times
has misquoted him. This has been faxed to the Business Desk and
bore no signature. Harrold said they do not sign news releases.
The World Bank Country Director was unaware of the common courtesy
of directing a letter to the newspaper that he accuses of misquoting
him.
Copies
of the taped interview are available with The Sunday Times. For
reasons of clarity, credibility and in the national interest, they
can be obtained by electronic media committed to baring the truth,
nothing but the whole truth before the public of Sri Lanka. This
recording clearly reveals what Harrold spoke.
He
says in English: "....given that there is such a thing as the
LTTE controlled area, an unofficial state and an officially recognised
part of this country as the LTTE controlled area....."
We
leave it to our readers to decide whether the Country Director of
the World Bank is empowered to declare that there is such a thing
as "an unofficial state." Is this a view endorsed by the
World Bank in Washington DC as its official policy? Or is it the
reason why Harrold had second thoughts and chose to declare he was
"misquoted." The gullible no doubt swallowed what was
declared. Some chose to pour scorn on The Sunday Times whilst others
accepted his version with open mouths, like the starved who would
receive food aid. But for many who were righteous, The Sunday Times
report stirred their conscience. That is why they not only believed
the front-page report but spoke their mind out pronto. Must anything
more be said about credibility?
So
why did Harrold change his tune? Is it not because of the mounting
criticism over his remarks? Why does he now say he swallowed his
words and that journalist Devotta would not have heard it properly.
Surely, a tape recorder is not meant to record a speaker swallowing
his words!! If as he claims he made a remark, that would have gone
on record. Is this not an admission that he did not make one.
Of
course, there were those sections of the media that lapped up Harrold's
version. They had a field day right through the week knowing very
well that The Sunday Times must wait a week to respond. They can
now see how they fared.
A
privately run TV and a State-run newspaper took Harrold's version
of the interview as gospel, and delighted in rubbing the nose of
The Sunday Times' credibility to the ground. Strange bed-fellows
indeed, these, coming together in common cause, knights in shining
armour, rising to the defence, by Gad Sir, like Sir Galahad, to
the defence of the beleaguered Peter Harrold Esquire.
Surely,
they might have heard of that classic rejoinder of yesteryear, from
historian, lawyer, politician and patriot Dr. Colvin R. de Silva
who, when told that 'the Sun will never set on the British Empire',
an oft-repeated quote during the colonial era, responded with the
tart remark; "That's because God does not trust the British
in the dark."
Not
all Sri Lankans, though, trusted the World Bank's Sri Lanka chief,
nor took him for his word. Nor wished to pay ' pooja ' to Peter
Harrold. They were much more circumspect. On Wednesday, JVP's propaganda
secretary and head of the Parliamentary group Wimal Weerawansa made
a special statement in Parliament.
He
said: "Peter Harrold only said he did not say the part about
'the kind of unofficial state.' Just by withdrawing that particular
phrase, can we stop it from being a slur on the sovereignty of Sri
Lanka? Our view is that this cannot be done. In his statement to
the paper (The Sunday Times) Mr. Harrold also states, 'And if we
are going to work in the North and East, then it is only right and
proper to talk to the LTTE and engaging with it can only be good
for the peace process in Sri Lanka'. Can we take this statement
lightly? When the World Bank representative states that in the north
and east the only party they can deal with is the LTTE, he is giving
credence to the fascist claim of the LTTE that the "sole representative
of the Tamil people is the LTTE."
On
Thursday, the Lankadeepa, our sister paper reported that The Sunday
Times would on Sunday bare details of the interview. This was followed
on Friday of the same fact in a front-page annoucement in the Daily
Mirror.
This
was to cause a flurry of activity in Harrold's office. By Friday
evening, Harrold's office, and Harrold himself had contacted The
Sunday Times and offered to come to terms. It was turned down. He
referred to the demos outside his office where a crowd of some 4,000
angry protestors were burning his effigy. He did not wish to see
a repetition.
The
newspaper offered him, to consider a statement of his own, under
his signature, if he wanted to clarify anything he wanted. That
was the extent to which a courtesy could be offered. By Friday evening,
the World Bank office issued a second statement for the week, this
time singing a different tune from the first one released the previous
Sunday.
The
local World Bank office was desperately trying to do some damage-control,
and evidently preempt what The Sunday Times had already announced
it was going to do, i.e. publish the full text of Harrold's interview
with The Sunday Times. In this statement (see full text on Pages
4 and 5) Harrold declared, "I stand by my previous statement
that I have never used the phrase "unofficial state" He
adds "Rather, what I said was ".....an official statement"
while discussing the Government's LTTE policy.
But
Harrold declared, "I deeply regret any offence or misunderstanding
caused by the published version of the interview I gave to The Sunday
Times which appeared on March 6."
Harrold
had something more to say: "Upon further review of our recording
of the interview, it is clear that a reasonable person could have
misunderstood me. I am sorry I did not speak more clearly, but I
am sure about what I said, and I think when it is heard in this
context, it becomes clear that I have not said anything that is
out of line with current Government policy."
Interesting
enough, Harrold in his first press release on Monday made no reference
at all to "any reasonable person" misunderstanding him.
He also says "...I think when it is heard in this context,
it becomes clear that I have not said anything that is out of line
with current Government policy.… Now, he was dragging the
Government as his shield. The state media support he received must
have encouraged him to say that.
The
Sunday Times had already published an excerpt of Harrold having
said that he was only following current Government policy (in dealing
with the LTTE).
For
this purpose, Harrold said, he had asked that an unedited excerpt
has been placed on the World Bank website (http:www.worldbanjk.org/lk).
The audio excerpt lasting seven minutes is as clear as the tape
recording made by Devotta.
Anyone
listening to it will hear Harrold say "....We have regarded
....given that there is such a thing as the LTTE controlled area,
an unofficial state and an officially recognised part of this country
as the LTTE controlled area....
In
other words, the tape recording by the World Bank's Sri Lanka boss
and journalist Devotta are one and the same. The only difference
- Harrold wants listeners now to hear it in the context he wants.
This is why he says "... I am sorry, I did not speak more clearly,
but I am sure about what I said, and I think when it is heard in
its context, it becomes clear that I have not said anything that
is out of line with current Government policy."
Harrold
says "I think" because he is not sure himself. As is clear,
it would be ludicrous if one expects his thoughts to register in
the tape recording. As for his invitation to listeners to hear things
in context, all what Harrold expects is for a listener to "think"
along with him. Peter Harrold is not Richard Nixon, and the World
Bank tapes are not the White House tapes in the Watergate scandal
that saw the downfall of the US President in the 1970s.
Any
' reasonable reader ' will see, the entire theme of his interview
is one where he contends that the World Bank considers the LTTE
a "legitimate stakeholder" in whatever they do in the
north and east of Sri Lanka.
At
the end of the hour-long interview, The Sunday Times journalist
Devotta knocked off his tape recorder. Harrold escorted him to the
entrance of his office room. His parting words to Devotta were:
"They (referring to his critics) are trying to make us feel
ashamed of dealing with the LTTE. We are not." Now, is that
an official statement of the World Bank? |