Today the US commemorates the tenth anniversary of the devastating 9/11 attacks targeting New York and Washington D.C. that killed close upon 3000. Sri Lankans, who understand only too well the spectre of terrorism that haunted this country for three decdes, will join the rest of the world in empathy with the victims and the bereaved in that horrific incident. It’s hard not to notice though, that Sri Lanka, a small and relatively powerless state that recently defeated the world’s most ruthless terrorist organization, does not get much recognition on that score from the western world.
As the UN Human Rights Council’s 18th sessions commence this week in Geneva, Sri Lanka’s delegation will face the challenge of warding off attempts by some western states to resurrect the prospect of an international war crimes investigation. These developments take place against the backdrop of an ongoing campaign against Sri Lanka fuelled and funded by the rump LTTE within the Tamil diaspora, largely responsible for the overseas-based war crimes agitation.
 |
| Rebels poised to attack Gaddafi |
It is no secret that outfits such as the Global Tamil Forum (GTF), British Tamil Forum (BTF) and Tamils against Genocide (TAG) believed to be fronts for the LTTE, operate freely in the west, frequently engaging with political leaders and high officials in the UN. One wonders why states professing to wage a ‘war on terror’ do not call their bluff by demanding that these groups publicly disavow links to the LTTE - which is a proscribed terrorist organisation in their host countries. Is it because domestic electoral considerations militate against such a course of action?
Revealing these links would go a long way in exposing the dubious credibility of some of the documentation cited in relation to the war crimes allegations against Sri Lanka.
Some of the western states leading the push against Sri Lanka are also involved in the NATO led attacks on Libya that have reduced parts of its cities to rubble. Those states now preside over the business of installing a new regime in Libya under the rebel leadership that they armed, trained and supported, under cover of UN resolutions that were intended to ‘protect civilians.’ Britain and France led the NATO operation, with the US choosing to play a secondary role. Russia and China did not actively support the action but did so passively, by abstaining during the voting on relevant Security Council resolutions.
It is only a matter of time before the dictator Gaddafi is ousted along with his relatives and loyalists, and a new Libya that is friendly to the west commences business under the leadership of the rebel-led National Transitional Council. In Paris where western leaders met to discuss Libya’s future, French and British companies were reportedly already jostling for the contracts in oil and infrastructure projects.
Ironically Libya, the state which has Africa’s largest oil reserves, is reduced to a situation where the World Food Program has to supply it with 250,000 tons of fuel to overcome the immediate crisis. The UN has also been called upon to provide hundreds of tons of food, water and medical supplies to Tripoli. The death toll is as yet unknown.
Perhaps it is true that once the dust has settled, Libyans will be better off without Gaddafi. But could this degree of devastation have been avoided? Democracy and human rights were at the forefront of arguments used to justify the armed intervention in Libya. But the western states that now seek to use the International Criminal Court to prosecute Gaddafi, earlier ignored attempts to negotiate a settlement with rebels through the mediation of the African Union. The AU peace plan included a timetable for democratic reforms, and Gaddafi had reportedly agreed to stay out of the AU-led discussions on the transition. The plan was rejected because Gaddafi’s departure was not part of it. ‘Regime change’ was in fact the unstated objective of the NATO assault.
Western media for the most part have supported the revolution, but the reports have tended to airbrush its uglier side. This includes for example the attacks on black African immigrants. Black African mercenaries among Gaddafi’s forces also bore the brunt of battle. Systematic targeting of this group by the NTC has reportedly led to hundreds crossing the border into Niger.
Of the rebellions that swept the Arab world in recent times, Libya differed in that it was stage-managed to a great extent through direct western intervention. John Pilger in a withering attack on western double standards in relation to the Arab uprisings lucidly described the ongoing hypocrisy:
“Gaddafi is a Bad Arab. David Cameron’s government and its verbose top general want to eliminate this Bad Arab, like the Obama administration killed a famously Bad Arab in Pakistan recently. The crown prince of Bahrain, on the other hand, is a Good Arab. On May 19 he was warmly welcomed to Britain by Cameron with a photo call on the steps of 10 Downing Street. In March, the same crown prince slaughtered unarmed protestors and allowed Saudi forces to crush his country’s democracy movement. The Obama administration has rewarded Saudi Arabia, one of the most repressive regimes on earth, with a $US60 billion arms deal, the biggest in US history. The Saudis have the most oil. They are the Best Arabs.”
Pilger in the same article describes the western freeze of Libyan funds to the tune of some $US100 billion as “the biggest bank robbery in history.” He refers to the assault on Libya as “a crime under the Nuremberg standard” saying that “like its imperial partners, Britain’s goal is to control Africa’s oil.”
Documents have now been discovered in Libyan government offices that show that US and British secret services (CIA and MI6 respectively) had earlier worked in close cooperation with Gaddafi’s regime. The files gave details of the so called ‘rendition’ of terror suspects to Libya, including that of the rebels’ Tripoli commander Abdel-Hakeem Belhaj. Belhaj said he had been tortured by CIA agents at a secret location before being returned to Libya.
The US, Britain and others who led the air raids on Libya to oust Gaddafi would presumably now be ‘best friends’ with Belhaj and his fellow fighters in the NTC. Such are the ironic reversals in the power games played by big powers in their quest to dominate the world, under the guise of promoting ‘democracy and human rights.’
The writer is a senior freelance journalist
|
E-mail