Hosting CHOGM in 2011:Sri Lanka Recieved Overwhelming Support
By K.T.Rajasingham
Port of Spain, 28 November, (Asiantribune.com):
On the subject of hosting CHOGM on 2011 in Colombo, Sri Lanka received the support of 45 countries out of the total of 51 member states participated in the Commonwealth Ministers’ Meeting on Wednesday held in Trinidad & Tobago. On the otherhand United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada did not support the holding the summit in Sri Lanka.
At the pre-ministerial meeting of the CHOGM , the discussion took place on the agenda about the next venue of the summit - 2011, of the Commonwealth Heads of Governments.
Earlier in 2007, when the CHOGM was held in Kampla, Sri Lanka has offered to host the meeting in 2011 in Colombo. The Kampala communiqué noted the offer by the Sri Lanka Government to host the summit in 2011.
When this matter was taken up for discussion on 26 November at the Ministerial Meeting, Sri Lanka received overwhelming support from member countries from Asia, Caribbean, And Africa. Only United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand opposed the Sri Lankan offer to host the CHOGM saying that this discussion should be taken by the Heads of Governments.
Asian Tribune learnt that the reason for the United Kingdom’s opposition to Sri Lanka's offer is said because Gordon Brown who might be facing the next parliamentary general elections, thinks that he should embrace the support of the undemocratic forces and pro-terrorists elements in the country.
Unfortunately he has failed to consider that his opposition might bring about a serious dent in the commonwealth system as a whole.
After the opposition forthcoming from UK, Canada and New Zealand, ministers have decided to refer this matter to the Heads of Governments regarding the Sri Lanka’s offer to host the 2011 CHOGM in Colombo.
The practice in the Commonwealth is to arrive normally any decision on consensus.
A senior official in the Commonwealth system when speaking to Asian Tribune told that when it means consensus it does not means to be made unanimous.
It is expected that those with the dissenting views has to compromise their decision with the majority in order to maintain the brotherhood in the commonwealth family.
The senior official further said that consensus reflects the majority view only, and dissenters have to compromise, otherwise it might lead to a serious repercussion to the Commonwealth family.
He described as far as SAARC is concerned decisions are taken on unanimous basis, where as in the commonwealth only based on consensus.
Asian Tribune learnt that many member countries are of the view that Sri Lanka should be given the opportunity to showcase its success in its humanitarian endeavor to liberate the Tamils from the terrorist grip and bring back the whole of Sri Lanka under a true democratic system.
The Sri Lanka Ministerial team is led by Rohitha Bogollagama, Minsiter of Foreign Affairs.
The ministerial delegation did their best to rally the support of 95 percent of the member governments participated in the Conference.
True credit should go to Rohitha Boggollagama for his eloquent presentation of the Sri Lanka case and also for his untiresome effort to gather the support from the countries in Asia, Africa and Caribbean.
- Asian Tribune -
Comments
Misplaced blame for national policy failures
"It is expected that those with the dissenting views has to compromise their decision with the majority ..." - Author
Yet the article opens with the assertion, "On the subject of hosting CHOGM on 2011 in Colombo, Sri Lanka received the support of 45 countries out of the total of 51 member states participated in the Commonwealth Ministers’ Meeting." The dissenters, namely UK, New Zealand, Canada and as reported elsewhere, Australia had obviously not compromised with the decision of the majority of African and Asian Commonwealth nations – a clear demonstration of the political muscle of the handful of powerful western democracies within the group.
We can use all the smoke and mirrors and statistics we can muster to depict a diplomatic failure appear a great national victory, but the bottom-line is: Sri Lanka failed in its attempt to host the CHOGM in 2011. Let's face upto it and inquire, Why? The broader reasons for the west's rejection have more to do with the overall policies of the present administration and not a reflection on the diligent presentation of the Foreign Minister or the motives of Gordon Brown for re-election. Like the Ostrich we seem to prefer to bury our faces in the face of reality.
Going forward the administration has two choices: either face up to the present realities and courageously bring about the tough changes or continue to evade difficult issues (because dealing with these could be politically unpopular) and continue to receive the wrath of the democratic west / US but at massive cost to the nation. The administration must stop brushing-off the pleas of the west - such as the directive by the US Congress with an almost unanimous unbinding resolution (just minus one vote out of 420) calling for the immediate resettlement of approximately 150,000 IDP's still lingering in camps. Or the request last week by a group of Eminent Elders comprising of ex US president Jimmy Carter, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and ex UN General Secretary Kofi Annan expressing their deep concern over the continued detention of IDP's and requesting swift government actions on national reconciliation. Continued outright disregard of well-intended requests of western leaders will only further isolate the administration resulting in similar rejections of GoSL as with the Commonwealth matter.
At least from the viewpoint of the west, very little has happened since the end of the war to promote peace on the island and the six decades old underlying problem continues with no resolution in sight. Western leaders understand that the measures needed to bring about lasting changes require tough decisions that may be politically unpopular - yet, it is exactly such visionary and gutsy statesmanship that is expected of top national leaders. Despite the opportunities presented by the spectacular military victories over the LTTE, a farsighted national vision for a "Great 21st Century Sri Lankan society" has yet to emerge. Instead what we now have - for the umpteenth time - is the same petite political bickering centered on personalities, this time in a nasty upcoming presidential election. Déjà vu, we are back to the future in 1956. Can we at least stop attributing blame on the west, Gordon Brown or anyone else for our own greed for power, sheer stupidity, lack of vision and total lack of guts to make courageous and righteous decisions? Please!
Democratic Freedom of choice 45 to 3
I do not understand how low these countries can go to please their electorate whether it is right or wrong. Canada joining the same group of England and New Zealand is very pathetic.
If one sees how this Tamil Diaspora was created, you can see how well these countries have become sucker nations to the propaganda of LTTE. The initial problem was created by the LTTE and set in motion all the events took place ever since. Only thing was that culprit got the benefit of entering these affluent nations.
After entering to these countries rather than working for individual prosperity these people banded together to continue with their nefarious activities at home. The dirty politicians in the west joined the LTTE band wagon for votes. Rather than directing the Tamils to do the right thing these politicians started to dance according to the tune of LTTE.
However, now the situation has become even more comical. The political leadership of this so called west is directly challenging the leadership of Sri Lanka. It is very surprising how most of these western countries side with the terrorists while bragging that they are against terrorism.