David Cameron has to act on threat to Sri Lanka – The Times
18 November 2013
18 November 2013
See below for extracts from the editorial in The Times, published today.
It is easy to be brave when the stakes are low. In Sri Lanka last week for the Commonwealth heads of government meeting, the stakes were indeed low, and David Cameron was, indeed, brave.
During his time in Colombo, Mr Cameron was a walking diplomatic incident. Most notably he unequivocally informed Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Sri Lankan President, that there should be an independent inquiry into the last months of his country’s 2009 civil war, during which numerous abuses and war crimes are alleged, mainly on the part of the Government. If Sri Lanka is not forthcoming in establishing one, he added, he will push for one to be held under the auspices of the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Mr Cameron did not stop at strong words. Prior to meeting with Mr Rajapaska, he became the first international leader since Sri Lankan independence in 1948 to travel to the country’s Tamil-dominated north.
The Tamil Tigers were a gruesome terrorist foe, but the suppression of Tamil separatism in all its forms went some way beyond the actions of a civilised state. The country banned journalists from the north at the time, and has refused to investigate allegations of war crimes, torture and brutality since then. For some, it was an outrage that Mr Cameron should have found himself in Colombo at all. For Britain to boycott the Commonwealth, however, would have been the beginning of its disintegration. The Prime Minister had a fine line to tread, and trod it well.
He should not stop there. His threat to challenge Sri Lanka at the UN should be acted upon. He should also give short shrift to the suggestion that British muscularity over the actions of any Commonwealth nation is an expression of colonialism. Bluntly, if member nations resent the spectre of Britain holding them to account, then they should be far better at doing the job themselves.
The Commonwealth has evolved into a disparate collection of nations, and sometimes seems perilously close to an anachronism. Today the diplomatic distance between Britain and many of its former colonies should be a spur towards candour, rather than equivocation. If the organisation is to survive, indeed, it must be.
Commonwealth Games
