Love notes from Serendib : War crimes: the professionals, minnows and the innocent
By Malinda Seneviratne
It is said that the Tories in Britain are really luxurious country gentlemen and that those in the ruling Labour party are petty chiselers willing to put anything on the public tab. Well, David Miliband, Britain’s Foreign Minister certainly fits the bill. He wanted the public to pay his a pram worth 199 pounds and ‘baby essentials’ worth 80. He even submitted claims for garden maintenance outside of the rules pertaining to such things. A chiseler, if ever there was one.
He has been described as being "more immature than he looks" as being "rude, stupid and politically and diplomatically naïve, desperate to prove he is a big player" and as "an embarrassment strutting the world stage". Being a Sri Lankan and as such being at the receiving end of Miliband’s ways, I can concur with these sentiments. The man is ill-informed, intellectually slow and arrogant to the core.
In all fairness, I think we should understand that the man has no choice. He is after all a politician and as such his political future is dependent on the sentiments of his electorate. This is why he is ready willing to scream ‘genocide’ when Tamilnet, the website of the banned terrorist outfit, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam claims that the Sri Lankan army had fired shells into areas where the LTTE leaders are/were holed up. No cross-checking. No substantiation of claim. He is contracted as per political realities on the ground (in the UK and not in the North Eastern corner of Sri Lanka) to repeat and amplify the tamilnet claim.
If this was not the case, i.e. if Miliband was a humanist, a man who concerns himself with humanitarian issues and takes personal offense when human rights are violated, then he would have blown many a fuse when the US Air Force dropped bombs in Bala Boluk, Afghanistan, killing some 150 people. There was verifiability there. It was not a claim made by the Taliban. People died. Women, children, the elderly and the sick. Are their lives somehow of less value than those of people claimed to have been killed in Sri Lanka? Is it because they happen to Muslim and as such, in Miliband’s book, come under the do-not-count category?
Miliband has two sets of eyes. Or else he has a peculiar set of eyes, prone to obtaining exaggeration in one instance and given to blindness in another. The United Kingdom along with the USA, bombed Iraq into the middle ages. Thousands of air sorties were deployed during that time, dropping millions of tons of bombs on places where there were millions of civilians. I am being brief here by the way. And briefly, let me remind Miliband and the world that US-UK led sanctions on Iraq caused the death of half a million Iraqi children.
Let us remember also that Miliband’s government threw in its lot with President George W. Bush because they believed that Iraq had ‘weapons of mass destruction’. Almost a decade later they are yet to find a single weapon of that kind. And they still cannot straighten out their twisted tongues to admit they were wrong.
So when Miliband goes country-hopping trying to find someone, anyone who would support his mad theories about what is happening in Sri Lanka, it is incumbent on those with any semblance of intelligence to ask him about Iraq, Afghanistan, weapons of mass destruction, the crimes against humanity of the colonial enterprise, the situation in British jails etc. He needs to be asked to come up with one example comparable with the case of Sri Lanka, where the world’s most ruthless terrorist organization was militarily defeated and where over 150,000 civilians held hostage were rescued. He needs to be asked where in such an exercise the term ‘genocide’ fits.
Miliband has one out, ‘I am ignorant and intellectually challenged’. Let’s give him that out. Provided of course that he shuts up thereafter. Let us switch to a man who lives across the Atlantic, a man widely acknowledged as being endowed with better than average intelligence, a man who doesn’t anything lacking in the charisma department, a man who was supposed to change the foreign policy of his country radically and thereby help clean its ugly image abroad. Barack Obama.
Obama on Wednesday the 13th of May, 2009, urged ‘both sides in Sri Lanka's 25-year civil war to take measures to avert a humanitarian crisis and aid tens of thousands of people trapped in the war zone.’ ‘Without urgent action this humanitarian crisis could turn into a catastrophe,’ he worried. "Now is the time to put aside some of the political issues that are involved and to put the lives of the men, women and children who are innocently caught in the cross fire, to put them first," he pontificated.
Well, he can relax. The LTTE did not do what it would not do. It did not release the thousands of Tamil civilians it was holding hostage. The Government did not do what it was not doing, namely, firing shells into the No-Fire Zone (declared not by the USA, UK, UN or anyone else but the Government itself, by the way). The catastrophe he feared did not materialize. The Government put first what it had always put first, the safety of the civilians. Obama can now listen to those who escaped the LTTE, those who survived the LTTE’s gunfire as they ran away as fast as their legs could carry. They will tell him what David Miliband would not dare tell him: ‘We were saved by the Sri Lankan security forces and we are safe now under the protection of the Government’.
Obama is a man of intelligence and does not have a reputation for using words loosely. This is why I am appalled by the slip of the word ‘catastrophe’ by the US President. Let’s talk catastrophe.
Does Obama know that his government maintains over 190,000 troops and 115,000 civilian employees in 909 military facilities in 46 countries and territories? Is he unaware of the abuses and usurpations of American standing armies and that they include rape, murder, sexual harassment, robbery and other crimes such as seizure of people’s lands, destruction of property and cultural imperialism?
Recently, this man who vowed to take a different approach to dealing with ‘enemies’, announced that he will move to block the release of photographs documenting American military personnel torturing detainees in Iraq, in a reversal of an understanding given earlier. The justification is that releasing such photographs would demoralize his troops. Well, well! It seems Mr. Peace is becoming Mr. Pragmatist all of a sudden. More seriously, Mr. Obama, who has ‘eyes’ to see ‘catastrophes’ where none exist, does not have eyes to see the catastrophes his country orchestrated and perpetuated. He does not have the wisdom to acknowledge that catastrophe is a necessary component of US Foreign Policy and has been so for centuries! Quo Vadis Barack?
I point these things out in the name of reason and the interest of balance and the ultimately self-defeating character of engaging in double-speak. This is the year 2008. The Economist of May 9-15, 2009 graphically depicted the relative strengths of key players of the European Union. The Anglo-Saxon model, represented by Gordon Brown, is shown struggling to keep its head out of a manhole. If The Economist did a similar exercise on the larger international community, it will surely have to thrust Obama in a similar gutter. One can get away with murder (as the USA has) when one is judge, jury and court reporter. The USA no longer has that privilege and Britain, hanging on to Uncle Sam’s coattails cuts a sorry figure when it attempts to play conqueror.
Sri Lanka is a third world country. It is not a perfect democracy. It is not a country that is unblemished in the execution of this war. There have been excesses, but given degree of threat it has done extremely well, compared to the USA and UK. Remember Barack, in Sri Lanka, despite all these constraints we still have free education, free healthcare and we recovered from a tsunami in next to no time. Got a comparable track record, brother? Human rights are not only about what happens or does not happen in conflict zones and IDP camps and even in this respect Sri Lanka’s track record is exemplary compared to that of your country or your client state, ‘Great’ Britain.
Let’s get serious. The world has too much colonial posturing and too little reason. We are coming out of a 3 decade long conflict. We don’t need you to cheer, seriously. We need you to appreciate that it was not easy, that we paid a heavy price. All we are asking is that you pack your envy into a suitcase and bury it forever. It is a small favour Barack. We can’t expect the small-minded man called David Miliband to be gracious at this point. Or ever. But Obama is a different breed altogether. Let us be hopeful.
- Asian Tribune -


Comments
Good article by Malinda
Good article by Malinda Seneviratne, perhaps compare to Obama that the old regime who rules the state department should be people who create more catastrophe. I am sure Obama needs a cleansing to his Sec of State.
You have written well
You have written well Malinda.
A well expressed article by
A well expressed article by Malinda that reflects the annoyance of so many Sri Lankans at the Obama/Hillary statements. Sri Lanka did not deserve them. But Sri Lanka is small and can be bullied.
As Malinda says:
"Sri Lanka....is not a perfect democracy. It is not a country that is unblemished in the execution of this war. There have been excesses, but given the degree of threat it has done extremely well, compared to the USA and UK." It is the "BUT" that carries a ton, especially in comparison with the powerful countries that choose to chide it.
Fighting one's own people is the most painful and difficult of wars as the US knows only too well from its Civil War experience. Yet, Lincoln went to war to protect the nation from the threat of secession. In that background, why cannot the US be more understanding, especially when it knows exactly where the Truth lies? It is NOT for lack of knowledge of the facts. It therefore remains a baffling logic.
In my assessment, the US's tin ear deliberately chooses to ignore the Truth for some "other reason", in order to take a position contrived to seem "balanced", but quite "UNJUST", and which demonstrates most painfully to those who voted for Obama, that Washington HAS NOT CHANGED. With the massive LTTE-supporter protests in London, Toronto, Ottawa and other world capitals, at which the fang-baring blood-dripping face of the Tiger flag is openly hoisted, there is an added eeriness to it all. But Miliband's antics have succeeded in making it more hideously ludicrous than ever.
It is sad that Obama has let his image get tarnished by being lumped with (as one Britisher described, that "pipsqueak") Miliband. Obviously a position taken for practical purposes is all that one can conclude.
AML
A good article by Malinda
A good article by Malinda and I support the views expressed by Voyager.
Incidentally, readers please note that many hundreds died in Sri Lanka as a result of the actions of Secreatary Clinton, Milliband, Foreign Minister of France and Eric of Norway recently.
They gave considerable hope to Praba that there could be a ceasefire and the surrender of LTTE was delayed pending actions of the above mentioned self-appointed International Community.
The deaths of Sri Lankan civilians over the last 2 weeks could have been avoided, if these self appointed leaders demanded a surrender early enough rather than giving wrong signals to LTTE.
KILLERS may be forgiven according to Buddhism, but they will not be forgotten, whether they are Praba or the International Community.
Well done
Well done
Brilliant, Malinda brilliant
Brilliant, Malinda brilliant as always
My rage slowly subsided, thanks Malinda
Nothing but rage indeed.
Nothing but rage indeed.
We need Dick Chaney to
We need Dick Chaney to repeat this to current US Sec of state
Last Para from "Some Questions for Dick Cheney" at http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0515-06.htm, last para
Question: in 2003
How come US Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca can go to Sri Lanka this week to urge the terrorist group LTTE to stay in the peace process with the Sri Lankan government, but such negotiations with Al-Qaeda would be "rewarding terrorism"? Are some forms of terrorism more "evil" than others? Aren't the Sri Lankans letting the "evildoers" win? Or maybe after 19 years of bloodshed, both the Sri Lankan government and the terrorists are on to something that we are not: violence will never achieve either side their objective. What is more important: defiance that brings more violence, or courageous and difficult humility which brings ceasefires, and maybe even peace.
Answer
But what do the Sri Lankans know. I guess if they had the MOAB like us, they wouldn't have to negotiate either.
The writer of the above
The writer of the above article should not overlook that the scourge of terrorism that gripped Sri Lanka was linked to the blunders of Sri Lankan politicians since soon after Independence. (From the photo it is clear that he is too young to know all the details unless he has read extensively on these issues.) If scores of Tamils had not been alienated by these divisive policies there would have been no terrorism. Because there would have been no divisive issues on which any militant group could have capitalised. And, now, if these issues are not adequately resolved, the glowing embers may again ignite. Therefore, it is essential to strike while the iron is hot and resolve all outstanding issues expeditiously so that, just as before Independence, all communities in the country can live amicably as brothers and sisters. Unfortunately, not all southern politicians have the sense to grasp these basic issues.
The writer states Obama is of a different breed altogether. Not a very smart comment because it could also have a negative connotation of sorts.
But Obama is the sort of guy who knows details about the conflict and problems in Sri Lanka without having to be briefed by someone who has never set foot in Sri Lanka. And Obama's recent comments, including one while addressing the Press at the White House, suggest that Obama also feels that the underlying problems that were ingeniously capitalised by certain Tamil groups have to be resolved expeditiously if we are to move forward as a country and ALSO PREVENT ANY RECURRENCE OF THE SCOURGE OF TERRORISM. Therefore, the current situation calls for going back to the negotiating table and a working furiously to resolve all outstanding issues BEFORE THE GLOWING EMBERS RE-IGNITE.
Change we can believe in...
Change we can believe in... Yeah... Sure
(Torture)
Candidate Obama - "My view is also that nobody’s above the law and, if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen."
Prez Obama - "we should be looking forward and not backwards"
(Military Commisions)
Candidate Obama - “we need not throw away 200 years of American jurisprudence while we fight terrorism”
Prez Obama - “will permit commissions to prosecute terrorists effectively … This is the best way to protect our country, while upholding our deeply held values”
.the list goes on.....the point being Obama proved himself to be one of the most shrewd politicians in the whole world. He sure will be better than Bush...in reading books :-D & understanding complex issues that he had had no clue about during the campaign season.
Post new comment