Situation
in North fragile and worsening:Haukland
Sri
Lanka Monitoring Mission Head Hagrup Haukland who served in Norway's
army for 35 years and worked in at least eight conflict ridden countries
including Bosnia, Iraq and Lebanon before resigning in 1999 as Commander
of the Armed Forces Peace Support Operation training centre. A year
later, he joined the Norwegian Foreign Ministry and was tasked to
study the conflict in Sri Lanka. After the then Sri Lankan government
and the LTTE signed a ceasefire agreement on February 22, 2002,
Mr. Haukland was among the first to arrive here a month later to
monitor the truce.
By
Shimali Senanayake
The outgoing SLMM head in an interview he gave the Sunday Times
hours before relinquishing his duties as SLMM Head on March 31said
the general situation was very very fragile and both parties have
a hell of a lot of work to do to keep the situation stable.
Following
are excerpts of the interview:
You
have been intrinsically involved in monitoring the cease-fire since
it was signed, and have been the longest serving mission member.
When you arrived there was a lot of euphoria about the peace process.
What was most significant in those early days?
When we arrived here in early March 2002, it was a very very positive
atmosphere whereever we went and who ever we spoke to. We experienced
that as a very positive thing and very important too for the parties.
We were involved in monitoring in the north and east and it mainly
included monitoring small incidents that were solved immediately.
There were direct meetings between the two parties and the majority
of the ordinary people were happy. This positive trend and atmosphere
lasted for approximately one year.
What
changed this?
After the last round of peace talks in March 2003, the situation
deteriorated. There were skirmishes and incidents, it was sad to
realize and to experience the situation moving from a more positive
trend to something more negative. The ordinary people were also
frustrated over the suspension of the peace talks.
There
were some incidents where we thought the ceasefire was over. And
I'm, happy to say we were wrong. Especially the incidents at sea;
the sinking of the Chinese trawler which was sailing under a Sri
Lankan flag and the sinking of merchant vessels.
The
most frustrating thing for us is to watch or observe the fear and
frustration among the local people related to incidents of violence
and killings.
Luckily the parties decided to continue and commit themselves to
the agreement.
What would you constitute as the turning points of the ceasefire
agreement?
There are a number of turning points. One of them was the
Karuna split. This, in my opinion was the most serious blow to the
whole process here. And also the killing of the LTTE leader Kaushalyn
and then the assassination of Sri Lanka's foreign minister.
When I look back at all that happened one thing is clear. It's the
parties – the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE who have
managed to keep the ceasefire not the SLMM. The SLMM has been an
important tool for both.
The situation in December and January can be considered as the climax
of violence during the ceasefire. You gave repeated warnings of
a possible outbreak of hostilities. How was this period handled?
The situation in December and January was very bad, then everybody
thought the ceasefire was gone. But again it proved to be a wrong
assessment on our side. It's a question of how much the soldiers
and the combatants, if you like, can take. It was the worst situation
SLMM had experienced in the cease-fire period. From Jan 25 after
it was agreed to have this Geneva meeting, all of a sudden the situation
calmed down. We saw a positive trend among the population as well.
Has
the situation improved after the Geneva talks?
In Geneva, a strong statement was made. A good one in relation to
us by reconfirming their commitment to fully cooperate with and
respect SLMM rulings, which the parties have to live up to. But
what have we seen in the last weeks; we have the killings in Vavuniya
and we have this situation in the east. Also in the last week the
incidents near Mannar, in the Trinco bay and Sampoor areas.
But
when you see what is happening, there are skirmishes now which are
very very dangerous as they can easily escalate. I'm sure the LTTE
and the government side are fully aware of it. So I sincerely hope
that leaders on both sides take responsibility, I'm not saying only
leaders at the top level, I mean all leaders on the chain of command
take responsibility on either side not to do any provocative acts,
act with restraint and do the utmost to maintain a stable ground
situation.
The
ordinary people of the north east are very optimistic and we saw
a change in the atmosphere when the parties decided to meet in Geneva.
But I'm sorry to say that based on the incidents we have had now,
it looks like they are sliding back to losing hope.
How do you interpret the veiled threats the LTTE has been making
about not attending the next round of talk?
I'm still optimistic, I think they will meet. They have no other
choice. A new war is beyond my imagination. Both sides can't afford
it,. It will be devastating; they know that much better than I do.
I say again, it's upto the parties to take responsibility and do
the utmost to maintain a stable ground situation.
What
is also frustrating is there is no direct dialogue, this is a bad
thing. There is a need to meet face to face and discuss how to proceed
in a positive way and also how to implement confidence building
measures. Because the way we see it now, there is no confidence,
absolutely zero. The atmosphere between the parties is very very
poisoned.
Have all the meetings at local level stopped?
Yes. The last meeting was in August 2005 in Jaffna, shortly before
the LTTE pulled out its political officers. Then after the Claymore
explosions on December 4, we tried to organize meetings between
the parties but the government side said, no. Meetings at the local
level are crucial. Because you are not talking politics but about
solving practical problems or if an incident should happen.The LTTE
was the first to suspend these meetings.
How would you describe the post-Geneva situation ahead of the next
round of talk?
The general situation is very very fragile. Both parties have a
hell of a lot of work to do to keep the situation stable. From my
point of view it doesn't make sense, there seems to be some kind
of competition going on to lodge as many complaints as possible.
But there should be a competition to keep the situation calm and
quite.
You say the situation is very fragile, dangerous where even the
atmosphere between the parties is poisoned, Are we looking at an
outbreak of war anytime soon?
No, I don't think war will break out. Either party cannot afford
it. But the worst thing that may happen is a postponement of the
next round of talks. That will be very negative to the process.
So do you think there will be a postponement?
A: The danger is always there. It depends on how much they can take.
But I'm not saying the parties are waiting for a golden opportunity
to say no. I'm not saying that. But if they don't meet in Geneva
as planned, then they must be fully aware of the consequences. So
I sincerely hope the government and the LTTE will meet, because
there is a bad need for them to meet and talk face to face and hopefully
there will be a more concrete outcome at the next round.
Allegations of armed groups engaging in violence has been recurrent
on part of the LTTE and dominated talks in Geneva. The military
says these groups are not operating in government-held territory.
But sources in the east say that your monitors have met with a group
of Karuna men in Valachchenai last week, is this true?
Yes, we met them, spoke with them. It was a very friendly atmosphere.
They identified themselves and they were there. I'm sorry to say
it's a mistake by the army commander to say they are operating not
in government controlled area. Then it's a question of the flow
of information between the army headquarters or the army commander
and the field commanders. It's a very delicate problem.
But
one of the LTTE's bone of contention is that the army is colluding
with these groups. Do you have any evidence to confirm this?
I can't confirm it. Nor do we have evidence that the army is backing
or supporting these groups. But there is no question that these
groups operate in government-controlled areas in the east even after
the Geneva talks.
Do
you see this worsening the already fragile situation?
This is the main block seen from the LTTE side. It's purely in the
hands of the government on how they want to handle this. I want
to add however, that every person regardless of faith, ethnicity,
whatever it is, has the right to live. They cannot have armed groups
running around killing people. The government is responsible for
the law and order in their area as the LTTE is responsible for theirs.
It's as simple as that. But it's a very difficult task to curb it.
What
is the status of report that is expected to be presented at Geneva
II?
It's in preparation, recordings are being done. We are keeping the
parties briefed weekly. It will be presented in Geneva by the new
head of the SLMM. So far most of the violations are by the LTTE.
A persistent criticism has been that the SLMM is biased toward the
LTTE. And on numerous occasions said there is no evidence to hold
the LTTE responsible for scores of killings.
That's one of the problems; those who are complaining don't provide
us with adequate information. The police and the LTTE are not eager
to give us too much and just bearing in mind that a majority of
killing have happened in government-controlled areas. It's bad and
sad.
It's ridiculous to say we are biased because we are here to help
both parties. It's hurting and frustrating when such accusations
are made. It's not truce at all.
One of the reasons to have new HOM from Sweden is amid charges that
there was a conflict of interest in having the facilitator and the
HOM from the same country. Do you think the change will help?
Hopefully, maybe. But the problem is not there because there is
a clear distinction between the two roles. I want to stress that
the facilitator has never ever interfered and given the SLMM instruction
on how to handle a situation and how to handle our tasks.
The access to the northern and eastern seas as always been a contentious
issue since day 1. It emerged again last week with the LTTE saying
that they had a right to use the seas adjacent to the land areas
they control.
A: The LTTE has no rights whatsoever to the sea, absolutely not.
Sri Lanka's waters – all around the island – are controlled
to the Sri Lanka navy. No one else. But the LTTE has not accepted
it and will keep pushing. The most serious incidents have taken
place at sea, that's how sensitive the issue is. But there are no
two words, there can’t be two forces at sea and the LTTE know
it.
|
