Thoughts from London

If you trust Norway why not Satan?
If there is anything called justice in this world, then the killers of Lakshman Kadirgamar should be named, shamed and punished. So should those who were accomplices to this dastardly crime that many world leaders condemned as an act of terrorism.

One such accomplice who should stand before a world court is Norway, the so-called peacemaker. It is an accessory before the fact and possibly an accessory after too.

But “justice” in this world is for the powerful and those who have the resources. Norway exploits the resources of Planet Earth not to do good as it pretentiously claims, but to back evil, fascist ideology and a suppression of human rights and not to uphold democracy and democratic values it supposedly practices.

Norway’s role of peacemaker in the Sri Lanka conflict lies exposed to the world, and whatever reputation it had lies in tatters. Yet while the people of the world recognise and condemn terrorism and those who resort to indiscriminate violence for political ends, the leaders of the “free world”, who pay lip service to fighting terrorism and its attendant evils, turn a blind eye to Norway’s duplicity and actively or passively support it.
Sri Lanka’s mistake — beginning with Chandrika Kumaratunga — was to make Norway the peacemaker placing undying faith in its impartiality and rectitude.

This role was greatly enhanced by Ranil Wickremesinghe and his close advisers when in power. Foolishly, they thought that their combined intellectual wattage was sufficient to handle the so-called peace process. But the Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) is living proof of the naiveté of the Wickremesinghe clique, an agreement that was fathered on the nation by Norway, the secret voice of terrorism.

The Sri Lanka government should have suspected what was to come when the LTTE accepted Norway in place of two other possibilities. Those of us who were journalists in Sri Lanka at the time remember how Norway through its NGOs such as Redd Barna and aid agency NORAD began activities in the North in the guise of development. Those first contacts made in the 1960s and 70s were firmed up over the years until its acceptance in the role of peacemaker which, in truth and in fact, should read troublemaker.

While the Norwegian Government through its foreign minister and others serve as protectors of the LTTE, the so-called Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) consisting of Scandinavians is the organisation on the ground that covers up the atrocities claiming that its role is not policing.

While Norway has been roundly condemned in Sri Lanka and elsewhere for abusing and misusing its role as peacemaker to the detriment of a sovereign government, one aspect of Norwegian foreign policy (some would call it interference in the name of conflict resolution) has been sadly ignored. One must go back to Oslo’s attempts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

That failed miserably and since then Oslo has been engaging its diplomatic efforts to bring “peace” to Sri Lanka. But we forget that the ultimate aim of Oslo, as well as other Middle East peace efforts, was to create, quite rightly, an independent Palestinian State. Norway’s clearly partisan conduct in Sri Lanka leads to one conclusion and one conclusion alone.
Its manifest aim now is to be the architect of a new independent state dividing Sri Lanka. Though the LTTE now and then — mostly then — speaks of a federal solution, nowhere in recent times has the LTTE leader said that he has now abandoned his goal of a Tamil Eelam.

The then chief negotiator of the Wickremesinghe government, G.L. Peiris once naively said after a round of negotiations with Anton Balasingham there had been a “paradigm shift” because the Tigers had supposedly lowered their demand for a separate state.

The Wickremesinghe negotiators thereafter started yielding yard by yard to Tiger demands conveyed, of course, through Norway playing its own role as backroom adviser while publicly appearing in its assigned role of mediator.

Lakshman Kadirgamar was one who early enough, had doubts about Norway and foreign mediators in general. That is why he insisted that Norway should be facilitator and not mediator. Unfortunately others did not have his foresight.

Successive Sri Lanka governments should share the blame for allowing Norway, supported by some others in the international community, to virtually dictate terms. Over the years, particularly during the UNP reign, the Tigers were allowed to leave their lair and roam wherever they wanted.

One should not be surprised if LTTE leaders are travelling on diplomatic passports so generously offered by Colombo, though Thamilselvan claims he does not recognise Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.

If the Wickremesinghe clique was on their knees before the LTTE and sections of the international community, this government has been weak-kneed too, ready to provide armed forces security escort to travelling Tigers even beyond what was envisaged.

If such capitulation continues one could possibly expect the government to move its artillery to Katunayake airport so that Thamilselvan is given a 21-gun salute each time he travels from the Wanni to horizons beyond.
It is such capitulation in the name of peace that has increasingly emboldened Norway and now other western nations and Japan, to interject hardened views as to how Sri Lanka should conduct itself.
The United Kingdom is equally guilty of duplicity. When the French called Britain perfidious Albion, it was for good reason.

Faced with unprecedented terrorist bombings the Blair government is shouting from the rooftops about fighting terrorism here and everywhere, threatening to bring legislation that contravenes human rights. All these years, western countries hectored us on human rights. Now they are not only ready to abandon their own commitments to the European Convention but blithely ignore Tiger violations of numerous UN treaties and conventions.

What is so laughable is that Britain is now trying to get all UN members to commit themselves to fighting terrorism, when in the past it was reluctant to sign up to anti-terrorism conventions and still continue to harbour leading members of banned terrorist groups in the UK.

It was Tony Blair who nominated former Tory cabinet minister, Chris Patten, to the post of External Relations Commissioner of the European Union. Patten, vilified by sections of the Colombo media when he came to Colombo about two years ago, underlined four points in his talks with the LTTE. He said the LTTE must definitely and without delay renounce violence; that any solution must respect the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka; there must be an end to human rights abuses including the recruitment of child soldiers; and the Muslim community must have its own representatives at the peace talks.

The LTTE has not listened. So what have the peacemakers’ done?
Britain now holds the EU presidency. As such will Britain state unequivocally whether the EU still adheres to these conditions that Chris Patten adumbrated as the organisation’s official position.

Will British High Commissioner Stephen Evans who has been playing footsie with the LTTE, its lackeys in the TNA and Tamil Rehabilitation Organisation please tell us whether Patten’s position is still valid.

Or will he sing a different tune, like the BBC Correspondent in Colombo Dumeetha Lutra whose unadulterated rubbish, calling Lakshman Kadirgamar a “strong opponent of the peace process” later metamorphosed into something a little more melodious.As for Norway’s role in destabilising Sri Lanka it might be said, like of Lady MacBeth, “All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand.”

Back to Columns