U.S. Moves to ‘stump’ Sri Lanka on Human Rights goes through Green Card holder Sarath Fonseka

If it were an ordinary, harmless interview why couldn’t Sri Lanka’s Chief of Defense Staff General Sarath Fonseka, who was on an official-personal visit to the United States, ignore the request of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and leave for Sri Lanka without getting Sri Lanka embassy in Washington to request the State Department to get clearance from Immigration and Custom Enforcement of the DHS?

Why did the Sri Lanka embassy had to send a ‘Diplomatic Note’ to Robert Blake’s Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs of the State Department to apprise that Fonseka has been immediately recalled by the President of Sri Lanka ‘on account of official business’ and therefore Gen. Fonseka was unable to attend an interview with the DHS on November 4 “since he has to leave for Sri Lanka”, and therefore the Embassy has already made travel arrangements for him to leave the U.S. requesting Robert Blake’s office “if the Department of State would coordinate his clearance from the DHS and facilitate his departure from the United States to Sri Lanka.”?

Border security and customs at entry point to the U.S. and departure are under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security whose office Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit was to ‘interview’ General Fonseka on November 4.

The Asian Tribune inquiries and investigations revealed that the ‘invitation to an interview’ with the Department of Homeland Security to General Sarath Fonseka was in fact not a ‘voluntary interview’ but a serious subpoena for an ‘official interview’. Fonseka as a holder of a Resident Alien status was obliged to accept under U.S. federal laws having no other alternative because of the wide quasi-judicial powers the DHS possess under federal laws.

Had he made any attempt to leave the United States on his own or with the encouragement of some wild attorney connected to his Washington friend Sanath de Silva whom he contacted ignoring the Sri Lanka Embassy he would have been prevented from doing so at the ‘point of departure’ as the US Customs, which is affiliated to the DHS, would have noted in their computer reading at the airport that he is leaving without fulfilling the obligation toward the DHS request.

It is a serious violation under the existing immigration and custom enforcement regulations, and the Custom Enforcement has police powers under federal laws. There was no alternative but to take him into custody and hand him over to the relevant authorities of the Department of Homeland Security.

The Sri Lanka Embassy in Washington was enlightened enough to understand and knowledgeable to know the seriousness of the nature of the issue at hand to strategically facilitate his departure without facing the interview with the DHS, a move Asian Tribune understands to thwart a ‘grand design’ of principal players in the United States from using Resident Alien (or Green Card Holder) Gen. Fonseka for the opening of an inquiry to ascertain if there were any war crimes and atrocities committed or were any human rights abuses during final months leading to the defeat of the LTTE with the annihilation of its leadership in May this year.

The visible principal players in the attempt to ‘nail’ Sri Lanka for genocide, rights violations and war atrocities/crimes are the South Asia office of assistant secretary Robert Blake and the office of the chief of staff of US Senator Patrick Leahy, both entities heavily influenced by the pro-Eelam professionals who want to resuscitate the slain Tamil Tiger leader Prabhakaran’s dream of Tamil Homeland in Sri Lanka.

The Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit of the Department of Homeland Security which was established in January 2009 - anyone knowledgeable of the operation, coordination and investigation of issues such as human rights, war atrocities and crimes and genocide within the United States government is well aware - does not act alone but in a close rapport with the Department of State and even with the Department of Justice, all three being high cabinet departments that work in collaboration with the White House and its National Security Council.

Which is why the assessments, observations, investigations and reports of these issues, issues that are connected to a particular country and that of to any individual of that country who has the capacity to get connected to these issue done by the State Department are shared with the newly established Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit of the DHS.

In the case of General Fonseka - whose has been mentioned in State Department reports his alleged involvement with human rights abuses – it is obvious that the State Department shared the information and data in its possession with the DHS. In the whole exercise of inviting Gen. Fonseka to the ‘voluntary interview’ the State Department cannot claim ignorance. And Sri Lanka’s alleged human rights abuses and war atrocities are not department-wide monitored but only by the South and Central Asian Affairs Bureau of the State Department headed by former American ambassador to Sri Lanka and now the bureaus’ assistant secretary Robert Blake. It is a well known fact that Blake’s office is in constant touch with Mr. Rapp’s Office of War Crimes Issues which released the October 2009 report on ‘incidents that took place during January and May in Sri Lanka’.

Further, the office of the chief of staff of Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee and chairman of the sub-committee on State Department, Foreign Operations and Related Matters, had a special interest in exerting pressure on Mr. Rapp’s office of War Crimes Issues and Mr. Blake’s office to produce a report of alleged irregularities of Sri Lanka during its offensive against the Tamil Tigers in the final six months of the ‘Eelam War 4’ that could be handily used to ‘stump’ Sri Lanka.

The culmination of this process is the ‘invitation’ to Gen. Sarath Fonseka for a ‘voluntary interview’ by the Human Rights Violators and the War Crimes Unit of the Department of Homeland Security.

The Asian Tribune investigation and research found that (US) federal laws are well in place to execute this process, and to bring the incumbent Government of Sri Lanka onto the ‘dock’ through a person who is subject to federal laws: General Sarath Fonseka.

(1) Genocide Accountability Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code allow the prosecution of acts constituting genocide committed by an alleged offender who is: (1) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States; (2) a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the United States; or (3) brought into, or found in, the United States, even if the offense occurred outside the United States.

(2) Section 1091 of Title 18, United States Code, prohibits genocide whether committed in time of peace or time of war. Genocide is defined in § 1091 and includes violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. There is Federal jurisdiction if the offense is committed within the United States. There is also Federal extraterritorial jurisdiction when the offender is a national of the United States.

The Genocide Accountability Act has legal authority to investigate an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States AND under Section 1091 there is Federal extraterritorial jurisdiction when the offender is a national of the United States. General Fonseka is subject to both these Federal laws.

Where does the State Department fit into the equation in General Sarath Fonseka’s issue? Can Robert Blake’s office declare ignorance?

Foremost, Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit of the Department of Homeland Security has no jurisdiction to step into the ‘area’ of the State Department, which is the foreign policy and diplomatic arm of the U.S. Government, to gather information of incidents that occurred overseas connected to human rights, war crimes, atrocities and genocide and prepare reports.

The Unit heavily depends on the wisdom of the State Department to scrutinize the information provided to it to prepare for the prosecution of alleged rights abuses.

The Asian Tribune contacts in the U.S. Federal government particularly highlighted the vital role the State Department plays in this type of investigations, scrutiny, interrogations, ‘voluntary interviews’ and finally leading to prosecutions or any other legal actions and remedies.

In Gen. Fonseka issue the U.S. State Department becomes a vital link to the DHS and Department of Justice from the beginning to the end.

In agreeing to persuade DHS to give clearances for Fonseka to leave the U.S. with no hindrance is a strategic step taken back by Robert Blake’s office at this moment.

The interest the State Department in general and Blake’s office in particular have in Fonseka’s issue (and then onto the larger issue of Sri Lanka) is manifested very clearly by the U.S. Senate action taken on 05 November 2009 in ratifying Human Rights Enforcement Act of 2009.

The bill (S. 1472) sponsored by Senators Patrick Leahy with three other Senators was unanimously voted by the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Subcommittee on State Department, Foreign Operations and Related Matters (both chaired by Leahy) on 05 November 2009.

This is a Bill to:

(1) establish a section to enforce human rights laws within the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) which is authorized to identify individuals suspected of serious human rights offenses and to prosecute, denaturalize, or extradite such individuals; and

(2) Consult with the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security in making determinations regarding the prosecution, removal, denaturalization, extradition, or exclusion of naturalized citizens or aliens who are suspected of committing serious human rights offenses.

The Bill defines "serious human rights offenses" to include genocide, torture, war crimes, Nazi persecution, or the use or recruitment of child soldiers. It amends the federal criminal code and the Immigration and Nationality Act to revise legal requirements relating to the crime of genocide.

The ‘identifying’ responsibility lies within the jurisdiction of the State Department. Fonseka was called for a ‘voluntary interview’ by the DHS based on State Department reports For the responsibility of ‘prosecution, removal, denaturalization, extradition, or exclusion of naturalized citizens or aliens who are suspected of committing serious human rights offenses’ lay in the hands of the Department of Justice.

The DHS needs to work closely with the State Department to further investigate and scrutinize the reports prepared by the latter, and DOJ needs to be in constant consultation with both the State Department and DHS for the preparation of legal action.

The chain reaction is triggered by the State Department, and in the case of ‘voluntary interview’ of Sri Lanka’s General Sarath Fonseka the State Department in general and Robert Blake’s office in particular was very much involved, and will continue to be involved in the coming months.

The jurisdiction over the offenses described in Section 1091 of the Title 18 of the U.S. Code is:

(1) the offense is committed in whole or in part within the United States; or

(2) regardless of where the offense is committed, the alleged offender is--

(A) a national of the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101));

(B) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101));

(C) a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the United States; or

(D) present in the United States.

The catch phrase is ‘regardless of where the offense is committed, the alleged offender is—alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States’.

Fonseka fits well into this description.

Summary Conclusion

Contrary to the belief that the invitation to Gen. Sarath Fonseka who was on an official-private visit to the United States by the Department of Homeland Security for a dialogue scheduled for November 4 was a ‘voluntary interview’ that Mr. Fonseka could have conveniently avoided in leaving the American shores on completion of his official-personal business the Asian Tribune investigations and inquiries revealed that the invitation for a ‘voluntary interview’ was a judiciary binding subpoena where he would have been taken into custody if he attempted to leave the shores without the DHS notification being fulfilled.

Which is why the Sri Lanka Embassy in Washington, the Foreign Ministry, and even the Presidential Secretariat had to coordinate with the American ambassador in Sri Lanka and Robert Blake’s office at the State Department.

The letter he received from the DHS was in fact a subpoena, and the reason for the interview was to get an insight into the handling of the war against the LTTE in the final months of its defeat by Sri Lanka’s Defense secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and to query about alleged human rights violations and war atrocities committed by Mr. Rajapaksa.

Mr. Rajapaksa himself is a U.S. Naturalized Citizen.

The Asian Tribune understands that the second officer who called from the DHS was ‘rude’ to Gen. Fonseka which talks volumes of the intention. The office that sent the subpoena was DHS’ Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit. The obnoxious officer was from this unit.

Gen. Fonseka came to renew his Resident Alien status which would have lapsed in few days of his arrival. There is provision under the Federal immigration and emigration laws that a holder of a ‘Green Card’ could extend the expiry period in visiting the local American Embassy with a valid explanation for a period of six months. But Fonseka arranged an official tour to the U.S. to visit his two daughters; the younger one still doing an undergraduate degree. Since most of his interests are here Fonseka needs to maintain the Resident Alien status.

And under Federal laws the U.S. has jurisdiction over him and over his actions beyond the American shores. We cited that law above.

The State Department is well aware of this.

With the knowledge of his ‘roots’ here and the jurisdiction the U.S. has over him and his actions in Sri Lanka and the knowledge he has over events during the Eelam War 4 the State Department’s visible and invisible hand is seen in the chain of events starting with several proclamations, observations, statements and comments the then ambassador Robert Blake made in Sri Lanka, his subsequent official and unofficial tasks at Washington State Department as assistant secretary, the October report on ‘incidents’ in Sri Lanka and finally Gen. Fonseka receiving the subpoena from the DHS to target Sri Lanka and her powerful defense secretary who happened to be the brother of this South Asian nation’s popularly elected president.

It is in this context that Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the U.S. Jaliya Wickremasuriya summoned his government’s guts to tell the United States officially that he is alerting (Mr. Robert Blake on behalf of his government) “to seek the assistant of the State Department concerning an unwelcome and unfortunately timed intervention by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in a matter that has the potential to complicate the existing dialogue between the Government of Sri Lanka and of the United States.”

This is a step taken back by the relevant U.S. authorities in facilitating Gen. Fonseka to leave the American shores without incident. But it is no where close to the final chapter to ‘stump’ Sri Lanka.

General Fonseka is the conduit to the effort of the State Department which receives ambiguous and conflicting information to prepare documents on Sri Lanka while the United States’ foreign policy toward Sudan, Somalia and Burma are strategically placed to prop up tin pot dictators as such adventurism in U.S. foreign policy is considered in the ‘national interests of the United States’.

Asian Tribune