Why train our guns on the ICRC?

Editorial-November 2, 2013,-

The Island report last week that an ``urgent review’’ of Sri Lanka’s relationship with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which has long been present here and rendered yeoman service during the war and also during the tsunami, was to say the least most disturbing. This is especially so as it said that ``perhaps the ICRC’s presence here was no longer necessary due to the conclusion of the conflict four years ago.’’ Does that mean we are seriously considering asking the ICRC to leave the country over Major General Jagath Dias not being able to travel to Australia for an ICRC event to be held there? If that is the case, it is essential that it is first established whether, for whatever reason, the ICRC which invited the Sri Lanka Army to nominate a participant for a workshop on healthcare in danger situations had rejected the army’s nomination. If it had done so, it is obviously necessary that it is asked the reason why. If there is no satisfactory reply forthcoming, then the whole business must and we repeat must, be carefully reviewed.

According to the report, an ICRC spokesperson in Colombo has gone on record saying that organization had no problem accommodating Dias. Then why is he not going to be present at the December event in Australia? That’s where a grey area surfaces. The ICRC spokesperson had said ``procedural matters relating to international travel were beyond its control’’ but had refused to clarify what exactly the problem was. To our mind, and we are only speculating because we have no information whatever on the subject, one possibility could be that that some organization other than the ICRC is paying the international airfares of the participants of the workshop as is not uncommon. Maj. Gen Dias may not be a persona grata of such an organization, be it governmental or non-governmental; hence these ``procedural’’ matters about which the ICRC is waffling. It cannot be blamed for that as it cannot be realistically expected to embarrass a funder. It may also be possible that getting Dias a visa had been problematic. If the host country, Australia, did not wish to issue him a visa and said so to the ICRC, it can hardly be expected to go public on that. There can be other reasons also and the right one may not even be close to the hypothetical possibilities stated above. But there must be extremely good reasons for us to tell the ICRC that they are not welcome here.

We fully understand the sensitivities of the military and the defence establishment to senior officers being snubbed and humiliated by various parties and countries for the role they played in the war. Dias was General Office Commanding the Army’s 57th Division deployed in the Vanni central front during the war. He subsequently served in Sri Lanka’s embassy in Germany before returning to Colombo to take up a position at army headquarters. It is not unreasonable to assume that it is Dias’ war time role that has made him persona non grata somewhere. That is why he has been shut out of the ICRC workshop by somebody other than the ICRC. The military and the defence establishments are understandably aggrieved by such singling out of their people who played a significant role in ridding this country of the scourge of terrorism. The Island report quoted an unnamed senior official saying that the US had earlier deprived senior army officers of prestigious courses on the basis of the so-called Leahy Amendment which is part of the US law and accused the ICRC of acting unfairly on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations although there had been no specific allegations against the 57th Division that Dias commander.

There is no escaping the reality that countries such as Canada, where there is a very large presence of Canadians of Sri Lanka Tamil descent, the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States are under pressure from pro-LTTE elements to embarrass the Sri Lanka government, its officials and the military over alleged war crimes. Although it happened four years ago, we should not forget that there was an attempt by the US Department of Homeland Security to interview General Sarath Fonseka, then Chief of Defence Staff. Relations between Fonseka, President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa had broken down at the time and it was widely expected that the general, once described by the president as the ``world’s best army commander’’ was flirting with the thought of running for president against Rajapaksa as a common opposition candidate. He was then in the U.S., where his daughters lived, and was believed to be looking for permanent residence himself. It was in this context that it was feared that there was an effort to elicit confidential information that Fonseka, in his capacity of army commander, was privy to by the US authorities. Eventually this attempt was happily aborted and Fonseka returned home without talking to the US agency at their Oklahoma offices to which he was summoned.

That incident is sufficient evidence, if such evidence is needed, about how foreign governments act in matters they see as of interest to them. The lobbies unsuccessfully mounted in Britain pressuring the Brits to keep of CHOGM, Canada’s virtual boycott (there will be very low level participation) and what is happening in India right now over whether Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be present or not at the Colombo Summit all point to the influence of Tamil constituencies over their countries of domicile. Australia is no exception and despite the help they need and have been getting in abundance from Sri Lanka over the illegal boat people, it is not inconceivable that some lobby had successfully moved to keep Major General Dias out of the ICRC workshop down under. That this is happening and will continue to happen is a fact of life that we will have to live with. But it will be manifestly unfair to blame the ICRC for something that is not of their doing. As we have said before in this comment, we do not know why Jagath Dias appears to be personal non grata with whoever is responsible for keeping him out of Australia. Who that may be is something worth finding out but it would be a big mistake to blame a wrong party. An ICRC presence here, whether there is or there is no war raging in the country, is part of our disaster preparedness. We never know when a disaster can strike and the presence here of a well experienced humanitarian organization with an excellent track record must necessarily be a comfort factor to all of us.