| Sunday 03 July 2011 |
The strategy of the Western powers, especially the US, Britain and France, in dealing with contentious human rights issues in the MEM (Middle East and Maghreb, that is Arab North African) countries, Asia and Africa have hardened considerably in the last year. There are three reasons; first when MEM uprisings showed a road to replacing authoritarianism with more democratic and also pro-Western regimes, ‘Why not’ they reasoned. Second, internal lobbies such as the Tamil diaspora, members of Parliament or Congress, human rights groups and the press have become effective as public voices, and thirdly, the behaviour of some Third World regimes have turned so horrific that even the Chinese and Russians are sometimes willing to go along with sanctions. A variation of the last theme is Delhi’s reluctance to give Colombo further succour because it has become a headache -- Darusman Report, Channel 4 (UK Sunday Times Food & Restaurant critic A. A. Gill not withstanding) and Jayalalitha. Placating Tamil Nadu is more important than pandering to Rajapaksa.
I have been highlighting this Western policy shift for a long time and events are bearing me out. Of course when it is not in the West’s interests (Bahrain or Saudi Arabia) to use pressure or too difficult to handle (Syria), strategy will differ. Indeed every case is different and the way the West deals with Libya, Pakistan and Sri Lanka is palpably case specific. Managing the relationship with Islam - all three manifestations (conventional, fundamentalist and radical) -- is another conundrum. At no time in US history, except during the two wars, has foreign policy been as much a Pandora’s Box as what Obama and Hillary Clinton are entangled in today. The Cold War may have been more dangerous, but at that time the game plan was clear and as straight as a die. Read more...
================================
UN rights chief warns of action in absence of S.Lanka probe
Sun, 3 July 2011 The UN's human rights chief Thursday warned Sri Lanka not to take too long in probing war crimes allegations, saying failure to carry out a credible inquiry could lead to international action.
"There is now a high level of expectations expressed by member states that Sri Lanka should seriously inquire into these allegations" of prisoner executions and assaults, said Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
"But this should not be an open-ended process," she stressed, noting that a previous Sri Lankan internal inquiry "failed to complete its task, never published its report and never led to a single prosecution."
"If that should be the case again, there is an intention for the international community to take further action. I certainly believe that the Human Rights Council should actively consider this matter," said Pillay.
Pressure has mounted on Colombo since Britain's Channel 4 broadcast a documentary that showed what it said were prisoner executions and bodies of female Tamil fighters who appeared to have been sexually assaulted.
A recent UN report accused government forces of war crimes, alleging that they executed rebel leaders who had surrendered.
An estimated 100,000 people were killed in the nearly four-decade-long Tamil separatist conflict, which began in 1972.
Pillay's remarks echoed that of the United States, which on Tuesday urged Sri Lanka to move quickly to address allegations of war crimes.
Colombo has questioned the authenticity of the Channel 4 footage but said that a local panel, known as the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, would take action if the allegations are proven.
