The BBC and war propaganda: learning nothing from the Iraq lies

by David McQueen (source: New left project)

Friday, April 5, 2013

The tenth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq was marked in Baghdad with a wave of deadly bombings that killed at least sixty people and injured over two hundred. In Britain the anniversary brought on a wave of retrospectives and handwringing recollections by the likes of the BBC’s John Simpson. Simpson and other media pundits who gave credence to the government’s claims on WMD a decade ago have yet to apologise for their role in building the case for invasion. Instead they mourn the deaths of innocents and worry that Iraq has been unable to ‘move on’ ten years after a violent occupation. In a recent Radio 4 piece Simpson was puzzled that despite the almost $100 billion dollars annual revenue flowing out of the oil wells many Iraqis seem pessimistic. That these billions generally flow out of the country, that basic water and electricity supplies have still not been re-established or that government corruption, kidnapping, crime and violence scar people’s lives seem to blind most Iraqis to the fact that ‘the glass is actually half full’ and that it is time to ‘turn the page’.

In a companion piece by Simpson posted on the BBC’s News site entitled The Iraq Memories I Can’t Rid Myself Of there are expressions of heartfelt compassion for the victims of the use of depleted uranium tipped weaponry, particularly in Fallujah. Here, according to a recent report, horrific birth abnormalities are more than fourteen times higher than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But Simpson does not clog his piece with such details or even outline the US’s documented use of illegal weapons such as phosphorous and depleted uranium because, he tells us, he is not ‘a weapons expert’:

"In the town of Fallujah, which was hit hard by American troops in 2004, I watched two toddlers sitting silently in their playpen, scarcely moving. They, like a disturbingly high number of children in the town, suffered from birth defects. Not being a weapons expert, I cannot say if these were the result of some particular weapon used by the Americans. But I wish I could forget the picture of those twins, helpless, deformed and brain-damaged."

Eleven years ago, before the US invasion, Simpson was far less reticent in pronouncing on illegal weapons. In a Panorama phone-in special ‘Iraq Crisis Interactive’ transmitted in September 2002 he appeared certain that Saddam Hussein had been developing weapons secretly. Gavin Esler put a question to him from a viewer in Manchester, ‘How safe is the rest of the world with a regime like Saddam’s?’ Simpson, one of several BBC ‘experts’ charged with providing answers replied:

"It always seems to me that the real problem behind all this is that, if you stir up Saddam Hussein, he’ll use the weapons that he undoubtedly has, secretly, and he’s been developing, without any question at all, use them against Israel."

To be fair, John Simpson was not the only Panorama reporter convinced that such weapons existed. His echo of the Blair government’s claims about ‘secret weapons programmes’ had been developed more fully in a Panorama investigation broadcast a week earlier in which Jane Corbin stated that:

"He [Saddam Hussein] still has enough material to manufacture 200 tons of VX gas in just a few weeks. And he’s got several hundred tons of mustard gas, the choking agent he’s used before, plus several thousand munitions to deliver it on the battlefield."

‘The Case Against Saddam’ concluded with Corbin stating that Iraq had an active and potentially threatening nuclear programme and was in possession of chemical or biological agents:

"The dilemma is that if politicians do not act, Saddam will continue down the nuclear path. But if he’s attacked, then he may use his chemical or biological agents."

The investigation also suggested that UN ‘containment’ had failed to prevent Saddam Hussein developing these weapons, but as Scott Ritter and other former weapons inspectors not interviewed by Jane Corbin had argued, none of these assumptions was correct.[1]

In November 2002 John Simpson’s Panorama report ‘Saddam: A Warning from History’ was also framed in ways that gave overwhelming support for the government’s ‘tough line’ against Iraq. It rehashed many of the arguments and interview material first shown before the 1991 Gulf War in a Panorama report entitled ‘The Mind of Saddam’ and portrayed Saddam Hussein as a duplicitous tyrant willing to use chemical weapons on his own people. As with Corbin’s report ‘A Warning from History’ Simpson’s investigation relied on official US and British government spokespersons, Iraqi dissidents and intelligence sources to build what Media Lensdescribed in 2002 as the ‘threat of the tin-pot Saddam Hussein and his rusting Scuds’ into a dangerous menace to world peace. The analysis by Media Lens, contemptuously dismissed by Simpson and others at the time, proved to be far more accurate than any of the heavily-resourced BBC investigations. They argued, correctly, that:

"Iraq is not any kind of threat, does not have weapons of mass destruction, and so these cannot be the real concern of the West as it passes new hair-trigger resolutions."

Yet dissenting voices that challenged the government’s phoney claims were almost entirely marginalised in the mainstream media in the build-up to the invasion. For broadcasters and particularly the BBC the obligation to ensure ‘that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under represented’[2] was largely ignored. Rational, informed and expert arguments for peace remained few and far between, while government and intelligence misinformation on WMD was taken seriously. The mechanisms for excluding experts, such as Scott Ritter, who poured scorn on the various bogus claims about Iraq’s ‘weapons programmes’ are still at play today with the continued reliance on a narrow range of establishment views which dominates news and current affairs. This tendency has been all too apparent in the retrospective reports and investigations on Iraq. News reports marking the anniversary have included respectful interviews with Tony Blair, who was allowed a lengthy defence of his war, while members of the anti-war coalition who brought a million protestors onto the street have, as before the war, found it difficult to access the airwaves.

Panorama’s most recent report, led by Peter Taylor and entitled ‘The Spies who Fooled the World’, broadcast on the 18th March, revealed little we did not already know. The programme could not quite bring itself to admit that the intelligence was ‘sexed up’ - a claim that led to the sacking of BBC Director General Greg Dyke - despite showing how ‘intelligence and facts were fixed around the policy’. The programme pointed to ‘misunderstandings’, sloppy, vague intelligence’, ‘errors in the dossier’ and gave space to the likes of former civil servant Lord Butler who argues the government ‘oversold the case’, but suggests that Blair and others made nothing more than ‘honest mistakes’. Clearly Butler was a perfect choice for the 2004 inquiry into the intelligence relating to Iraq'sweapons of mass destruction.

Peter Taylor’s report points to the known fabrications, the use of Iraqi exiles and conmen prepared to say anything the Bush administration wanted to hear and the ‘Rolls Royce information campaign’ directed at a deeply sceptical public. But at the end we are supposed to accept that this was not about going to war on a lie, so much as the result of ‘unreliable’ sources and ‘self-deception’. The investigation shows that where intelligence was ‘limited, sporadic and patchy’ it was transformed by the Joint Intelligence Committee and Blair’s spin doctors into material which was ‘extensive, detailed and authoritative’. In other words it was ‘sexed up’ - which is about the kindest thing that could have been said about it, but which the BBC is still too nervous to state openly. The term ‘sexed up’ appears only as something that ‘the government’s critics’ say, without a mention of, or word from, former BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan and what he went through. Alastair Campbell is never off a BBC sofa these days, but the man he hounded for saying just this cannot possibly appear.

And of course the BBC continues to exclude the real anti-war leaders like Tariq Ali, Tony Benn, George Galloway or Lindsey German from retrospectives such as this because they might really embarrass the Corporation and remind those reporters still in positions of authority about their work ten years ago. Reports by John Simpson, Jane Corbin and others who sold the government’s line on Iraq’s ‘weapons of mass destruction’ to the British public bear a heavy responsibility and it is natural that they should wish everyone to ‘turn the page’. But it is not so easy to forget. Just as appointing Tony Blair the Middle East peace envoy added insult to injury the BBC’s ten year retrospectives have only added salt to the wounds.

Non implementation of law and order is worrying since the government is more than capable of restoring order

Non implementation of law and order is worrying since the government is more than capable of restoring order

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Bishop Duleep de Chickera

SRI LANKA: Inter-religious integration—Inclusion not intrusion
A Reflection by Bishop Duleep de Chickera
Over the past months Sri Lankans have been educated on two Arabic words: halal and haram (that which ispermissible and not permissible). Unfortunately the circumstances of learning have been an unprecedented antagonism towards the Muslim community much deeper than the halal issue. This trend must be addressed without delay by the government and all religions before it spirals into a much wider conflict, which the country can ill afford.

The government's responsibility is to do what all governments are mandated to do: ensure the prompt implementation of law and order without fear or favour to any. This should include steps to curb the provocation of religious animosity and ensure the security and dignity of the Muslim community; an intrinsic part of the nation from well before the Ninth Century. 

That this has not happened is worrying since the government is more than capable of restoring order. It consequently suggests that there is an anticipation of political gain in the campaign against Muslims. If this is the case— and the weight of the foremost authority appointed to protect all is seemingly behind a divisive sectarian force—an afflicted minority has every right to feel betrayed. In this state of vulnerability they have an equal right to expect goodwill and solidarity from their neighbours of other religions in particular. 

That this too has not been substantially demonstrated is an equally disturbing feature of today's multi-religious society. More than anything else, it points to the failure of moderates of all religions, including Islam, to fulfil certain essential obligations that feed inter-religious integration. 

These obligations are: 
That moderates of all religions should sustain mutual relationships of friendship and trust in times of tension as well as in harmony.

That moderates should together discern how best the adherents of any one religion are to be free to live by their core teachings and practices, integrate with other religions whose freedom to live by their own teachings and practices is to be recognised and upheld and find a dignified way forward when these interests run into conflict. 

That moderates should welcome the distinct presence of the other, gather the liberating resources that their respective religions offer and strive together to eliminate humankinds' common life threatening enemies such as poverty, greed, violence, abuse, discrimination and so on. (We have done this with ease in the areas of food, dress and music. But it has to spread to include moral values and spiritual insights that impact on the socio-political quality of life as well). 

That moderates should sustain a restraining dialogue with those within their own camps whose categorical views and behaviour are likely to hurt the religious sensitivities of others. 

And that moderates should engage in self-scrutiny; keep an ear to the ground and an ever vigilant eye on any provocative or offensive message that the practice and behaviour of their respective communities may convey to others, no matter how sincere the intention may be. 

It is precisely a disinterest and bankruptcy in the potential of these obligations that has polarised, paralysed and prevented the religions from anticipating the emergence of the current anti-Muslim campaign and arresting its escalation. 

A conversation in the Bible between Jesus and a group of people addresses this type of stalemate. Jesus is informed of an act of political violence in which Pilate has massacred 30 persons from Galilee (the socially cosmopolitan and politically restless region in Palestine). He immediately vindicates those massacred leaving his listeners to guess who then was guilty, refers to another incident of violence to indicate a trend in sectarian violence and promptly calls his listeners, who imagined they were neutral and safe, to "repent" lest they also "perish". (Luke 13.1-5)

The point is clear. None remains neutral when sectarian violence becomes a trend. All inevitably get sucked in as victims or violators whether active or passive. So all, including those who think they are neutral are to repent. They are to stop, take note of happenings, look within, examine their inner motives in relation to the highest values of their religion or ideology and re-emerge with a reconciliatory stance.

At the height of the anti-conversion tensions towards the middle of the previous decade, the Congress of Religions refused to remain neutral. As it engaged in intense reflection on the issue, the complex task at hand became clearer. This was to recognise the crisis, take responsibility for the insensitive behaviour of some within its respective religions, honour the teachings of its respective religions, safeguard the democratic freedom of choice and stay together through it all. The reconciliatory outcome was a proposal for a national inter-religious council as an alternative to legislation, with authority to address inter-religious tensions and much more, build inter-religious goodwill and trust. 

On hindsight one wonders whether if this proposal had been implemented by the then government, the current anti-Muslim campaign would not have been sensed and dealt with in its early stages; at the table and not on the streets.   

At a recent inter-religious conversation, a participant turned to the others and invited a critique of his own religious community in order that it may engage in self-correction. This type of question usually says more than is asked and has a lesson for all. Each is privileged to learn from the other about one's own religious behaviour. But this can only happen when sufficient goodwill and trust has been built and the religious 'other' is invited with respect from the periphery into the middle of the discourse. 

Living with integrity with other religions is never a betrayal of one's own; rather it exposes the superfluous and sometimes harmful beliefs and practices that have accumulated within our respective religions over the years. From here the courage to discard these excesses ironically draws us back to the core of our own legitimate beliefs and practices and motivates us to welcome, live with and work with the 'other'.

When this happens, the distinction between a world religion and a cult is clarified and the course of history also influenced by religious sensibility. If not, all religion, not just the 'other one', deserves to be judged by a world which will simply look elsewhere for light and life. 

With Peace and Blessings to all

Bishop Duleep de Chickera

Matter Of Urgent Public Importance: Today The Muslims Are Fearful, Anxious And Hurt

By R Sampanthan -April 9, 2013 

R Sampanthan

Hon Speaker,

Parliament,

Sri Jayawardenapura, Kotte.

Standing Order 23(2) – proviso: Notice of question relating to matter of urgent public importance – to be made on 9^th April 2013

I wish to make a statement on a most grave issue of national concern, relating to the safety, security and wellbeing of the Muslim people of this island. The Muslim people have been historical inhabitants of this island, and have contributed immensely to its development for many centuries. They have their own unique customs and traditions; food and dress; and are devout adherents of a very great religion. As the cultural benefactors of the Islamic Golden Age which spanned the 8^th to the 13^th centuries, the Muslim people of Sri Lanka have scaled the heights of the whole range of human endeavour – from art and music, to medicine and law, and science, enterprise, academics and so on.

Today however, the purveyors of hate are unleashing a bitter and spiteful campaign against the Muslim people. I do not need to recount the many acts of mob violence that have taken place in the last few months. Muslim women who choose to wear conservative religious dress have been molested and abused by strangers in broad daylight. Today the Muslim people are fearful; anxious and hurt by the invective surrounding them. As fellow minorities, the Tamil people feel the pain, the insecurity, the fear and the anxiety of our Muslim brothers and sisters. The relationship between the Tamils and Muslims has always been close – sometimes strained and to our perpetual shame, though very rarely, even violent and cruel – but always close. Our people are too closely intertwined for one to think that it can survive the fate of the other. We are connected to each other just as we are connected to the Sinhalese, the Malays and the Burghers; but the bonds of a common language and home cannot be broken easily. And so, when our Muslim brothers and sisters are harmed on the street; or attacked by mobs; or have their Mosques vandalized; we cannot unconcerned spectators.

Mr. Speaker, as Leader of the Tamil National Alliance, I demand that the violence against the Muslim people cease now. I demand an end to the repulsive hate speech that we hear every day. I demand an end to the collusion of the state in this campaign of hate. We are conscious that the vast majority of the Sinhalese Buddhist people do not condone such actions and that they would very much wish to live in peace and harmony paying due respect to the rights of other Peoples. As victims of the worst atrocities, we the Tamils have demanded that the country and the world heed our call for accountability, justice and the guarantee of non-recurrence. We wish to emphasize that the enforcement of law and order, and ensuring the safety and security of all Peoples including the Muslim People is primarily the responsibility of the State. Recent events have shown that the State has not discharged this responsibility in a manner beyond reproach.

We therefore call upon the government to refrain from acts of partisanship and discharge its constitutional duty be ensuring that equal protection of the law be afforded to all Peoples in this country including the Muslim People.

*R Sampanthan -Parliamentary Group Leader, Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kadchi (TNA)

Spreading communal violence is a government move – Coordinating Committee of Trade Unions

TUESDAY, 09 APRIL 2013 

The wave of thuggery of 'balasena' unleashed in public recently and thuggery of similar gangs of thugs have been let loose on the society with the knowledge and patronage of the government for its political requirement states the Coordinating Committee of Trade Unions.

"The government has reckoned that unleashing gangs of thugs with Buddhist priests to create hatred towards Muslims would get some sort of an acceptance in the Sinhalese community. The inactiveness of the police in incidents that have been manipulated by these gangs so that they could carry on their crimes without any hindrance and spread terror among masses indicate that the government has cramped law and order in the country to suit their agenda. These measures should not be treated lightly," states the Coordinating Committee of Trade Unions.

The Coordinating Committee of Trade Unions consists of National Trade Union Center (NTUC), Jathika Sevaka Sangamaya, Federation of University Teachers' Associations (FUTA), Free Trade Zone General Employees Union, Lanka National Estate Workers Union, Inter Company Employees Union, United Workers' Union, UPTO and several other trade unions.

The announcement further states, "The economic policy of the government is so unsuccessful that it cannot have any room for democracy in the country. Loans for daily expenditure too have to be got for very high interests. The loans requested from the IMF and China have not been granted. Even capitalist system doesn't have any process to maintain an economy when there is no proper management and large scale economic plunders are being carried out. As such, the government will be left with suppressing the working masses that would rise up against the act of burdening them with the economic burden of the government.

The government has understood that the rise up of the working masses against the destruction of the economy would not be stopped by repressing incident by incident. The government has also learnt that traditional methods of repressing by deploying police and Army have defunct. This is why these gangs of thugs with a religious appearance are unleashed on the society. The government may be calculating that through such manipulations the whole society could be benumbed. The attempt is to divide the working masses on religious and communal basis.

Hence, we, as trade unions that represent genuine unity of the working masses, condemn anti-religious and communalist thuggery. Also, we call upon all democratic organizations, Individuals, trade unions and media activists to rally with us to act against Sinhalese, Tamil and Muslim communalist moves."

The announcement on behalf of the Coordinating Committee has been released with the signatures of Wasanthe Samarasinghe, Sunil de Silva, Muditha Karunamuni, Chandraguptha Thenuwara, Anton Markus, Mahinda Jayasinghe and K. Velayudan.

ONE MAN’S GARBAGE BECOMES ANOTHER MAN’S PROBLEM…

April 9, 2013  

A tense situation prevailed in Kolonnawa today (09) when police attempted to remove protestors near the Meethotamulla garbage dump, demanding a written assurance to halt garbage disposal at the location. Police officers acting on a court directive to use minimum force to evict the protestors were unable to control the situation, resulting in the Anti-riot Squad being called in to disperse the crowd. It had been reported that several protestors were also arrested in the process. (Pic by Sanjeewa Lasantha)

India Can Be Against The LTTE But Cannot Afford To Be Against The Tamils

By Hardeep S. Puri -April 9, 2013 

Hardeep S. Puri

Contemporary developments in India’s foreign policy are often based on perceptions and not facts, views divorced from reality and political advocacy based on make-believe. India’s approach to the Sri Lankan issue and the vote in the Human Rights Council (HRC) is a case in point. Variously described as a “new low” in our foreign policy and a departure from our principled stand of not supporting country-specific resolutions, this line of reasoning suggests that New Delhi should ignore and overrule regional sentiment, and refrain from meddling in the affairs of a small neighbour.

But first the perceptions. One, in 1956, Solomon West Ridgeway Dias (SWRD) Bandaranaike enacted the Sinhala-Only Act. Sections of the political class in New Delhi welcomed it as a consolidation of anti-imperialist sentiment. Years later, Tamils were reduced to second-class citizens and discrimination against them became systemic and entrenched. The anti-Tamil riots in Colombo following the killing of the Mayor of Jaffna, Alfred Duriappa, by a young Prabhakaran led to the rise of Tamil militancy.

Perception two. Most Sinhalese believe, with good reason, that Tamil militancy, rightly viewed by them as terrorism, would not have succeeded in tearing apart Sri Lanka’s social fabric but for support from across the Palk Straits. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi sought course correction. He committed India to Sri Lanka’s unity and territorial integrity. This fundamental turnaround meant India would not support the break-up of Sri Lanka and would also cooperate in ending support for terrorism. There was, however, one caveat. The Tamil minority should be treated with dignity and as equal citizens of a multicultural, multiple-ethnic and multilingual Sri Lanka.

Resolution was minimalist

What the international community is questioning is not Colombo’s military operation against the LTTE or human rights violations but specific allegations of war crimes during the last 100 days of military operations. Visual documentation, including by triumphant victors on mobile phones has contributed to Sri Lanka’s discomfort. The U.S. resolution at the 19th session of the HRC in March 2012 was a minimalist attempt. It invited Sri Lanka to act on the recommendations of its own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. Even the assistance to be made available to Colombo would have been provided only with its consent. Instead, Colombo chose to prevaricate. With additional visual documentation being made available, the demand for accountability gained momentum. Having voted in favour of the resolution in March 2012, it was next to impossible for India to change its vote in March 2013, especially in the absence of any credible steps by Sri Lanka towards reconciliation and devolution.

It is both in India’s and Sri Lanka’s interest to get a full and final closure on these allegations. Not to do so will allow the wounds to fester.

Sovereignty has never succeeded in providing a cover against genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity. To suggest that India does not support country-specific resolutions is absurd. Even more, that we have a principled position on this. In any perceived clash between principle and national interest, it is invariably the latter that is invoked and reigns supreme. Following the anti-Tamil riots in Colombo in 1983, New Delhi mustered sufficient courage to spearhead a resolution against Sri Lanka in the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and the Protection of Minorities. We vote in favour of similar resolutions against Israel only because they deal with gross and systematic violations of human rights of Palestinian people in the occupied territories. We have never hesitated to take a position on country-specific resolutions whether on DPRK or Iran, whenever our national interest so demanded.

To dismiss popular sentiment in Tamil Nadu as the machinations of politicians is both a misreading of the situation and a recipe for disaster. Why should Sri Lanka not be held to account for not respecting understandings given bilaterally to India, such as those of April-May 2009?

13th Amendment

India can be against the LTTE but cannot afford to be against the Tamils. The problem both amongst the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka and large sections of the Tamil population in India, is that the LTTE successfully manipulated Tamil opinion by projecting itself as the only physical shield against Sinhala repression. We cannot wish away this sentiment. The only safeguard for the Tamils in Sri Lanka is delivery of the promised devolution based on the 13th Amendment.

Both the AIADMK and the DMK, along with the smaller parties in Tamil Nadu are on the same page on the Sri Lanka issue. The problem will continue to fester till Colombo has a genuine change of heart. Recent signals are anything but encouraging. Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa said on March 27, 2013: “Could we afford to have a provincial administration here, which pointed a gun at the national leadership at the drop of a hat? We don’t want to be at the mercy of scheming provincial administrations.” Let alone the 13th Amendment, the Defence Secretary seems to be suggesting the winding up of provincial councils altogether!

Notwithstanding assurances to India, the “Brothers” running Sri Lanka appear to have no intention to move on political reconciliation and devolution. This “majoritarianism” in total disregard of respecting and protecting the rights of minorities is a narrow and calibrated political strategy designed to safeguard Sinhalese parliamentary strength. The recent attacks on the Muslim trading community in the heart of Colombo by fanatic Sinhalese, allegedly led by Buddhist monks are manifestations of similar callous and cynical disregard for the rights of linguistic, religious and cultural minorities. India did the right thing by supporting the resolution on war crimes.

Exaggerated projections of Chinese inroads and influence are a bogey which many of our smaller neighbours periodically try on us. Apart from being practical, the Chinese are also hard headed. They will pursue economic and commercial opportunity irrespective of the way India votes. Support for Sri Lanka up to 2012 did not prevent them from looking for commercial projects there. Many Chinese successes have something to do with our own inability to deliver commercial projects on time.

Sri Lanka is not only India’s closest neighbour but in many respects, culturally and emotionally, closest to us as well. We need to reach out to Colombo and drive home the point that it takes two to tango. Relations between countries are assiduously built, step by step. Unless Colombo treats its Tamil citizens with dignity and respect, New Delhi will continue to have limited options. If New Delhi continues to base its choices on misplaced “perceptions” and does not effectively articulate the reasons for the choices so made, only brickbats will be in the offing.

*Hardeep S. Puri is India’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York. He served as Political Secretary of the Indian High Commission in Colombo Between 1985 to 1989 when the Indo -Lanka Agreement came into force. This article appears in “The Hindu”

Ambassador Sison’s Remarks:“US Policy Towards and Continuing Engagement with Sri Lanka” to the Foreign Correspondents Association

AS DELIVERED -April 8, 2013

Thank you for inviting me to speak tonight.  It is a pleasure being here, and also a pleasure to have the opportunity to show my support for the role of the media here in Sri Lanka at a Foreign Correspondents Association meeting.  

I have been asked to speak about the next steps for U.S. engagement with Sri Lanka.  First of all, let me emphasize that we value our relationship with Sri Lanka and the people of Sri Lanka.  I would like to spend a few moments talking about how we see the current situation in Sri Lanka, and why the U.S. decided to table a second resolution a few weeks ago at the Human Rights Council.  

The people of the United States have a long history of friendship and cooperation with the people of Sri Lanka.  In the 1800s, the sole representative of the U.S. government was a consular agent.  He is said to have sat on the porch of the Galle Fort Hotel, waiting for the ships to come in so he could register American sailors.  

We seem to be a lot busier these days at the U.S. Embassy! Now, in the 21^st century, our ties with Sri Lanka have continued to expand and deepen.  Today we are one of the largest contributors of humanitarian and development assistance in Sri Lanka, as well as a big supporter of education and civil society.   

The U.S. has a good friend of Sri Lanka in times of need.  The United States was one of the first countries to respond to the devastating 2004 tsunami.  The U.S.S. Duluth arrived within days of the disaster to provide assistance, and we were one of the leading partners in helping with recovery from that terrible event in communities all over the island.   

The U.S. also helped the government and people of Sri Lanka in every way we could to try to end the LTTE’s reign of terror – decades of LTTE attacks which included countless suicide bombings and the assassination of Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa.   

We, too, have faced terror.  We know how it can tear at the very fabric of state and society. 

The United States was at the forefront in formally designating the LTTE as a terrorist organization.  This designation played a key role in helping to dry up the LTTE’s overseas support networks, helping to contribute to its ultimate demise.  The LTTE remains on the U.S. Foreign Terror Organization list to this day.  We know that families and communities all over Sri Lanka suffered terribly during these many long years of violence.  So we have been a longtime friend of the Sri Lankan people, in good times and in bad.  We know the challenge of maintaining national security against the threat of terrorism. 

An equally important challenge, however – one that bears on our very identity as a nation – is to protect and maintain our core principles of democracy and rule of law during difficult times. 

The United States and Sri Lanka have long had a strong relationship.  It is a relationship that historically had been based upon shared democratic values.  And that is precisely why the United States will always speak up when we feel such values are threatened.   

As many of you know, the United States remains particularly concerned about threats against, and attacks on, media outlets in Sri Lanka.  Several prominent journalists have fled the country, and a number of attacks on journalists remain unresolved.  This includes the 2009 killing of “Sunday Leader” editor Lasantha Wickrematunge, the January 2010 abduction of Prageeth Ekneligoda, and the July 2011 attack on Uthayan news editor Gnanasundaram Kuganathan.   

I know that this room full of journalists is only too aware that attacks against the media continue to this day, and that suspects are rarely apprehended – or, if apprehended, are almost never convicted.  Just last week, the Uthayan offices in Kilinochi were attacked by masked assailants, one of a series of unsolved attacks against Uthayan, and its employees over the past several years.   

I raise these issues because the United States has always worked to defend the universal right to freedom of expression.  We believe freedom of expression by all individuals, including the media, is not only an essential democratic prescription, in its own right, but also critical in protecting other democratic institutions and values.  

In a participatory democracy, people must have access to accurate information about the situation in their country and the activities of their government if they are to make informed choices – choices which provide the fundamental legitimacy of the government that represents them.   Thus, we urge the Sri Lankan authorities to fully investigate the Uthayan attack and hold the perpetrators accountable.  

Support for freedom of expression was in fact one of the many recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission report, and was also raised in the March 2013 resolution at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.  The United States has raised other concerns recently, as well, including dismay over the process that led to the impeachment of the Chief Justice and what that means for a free and independent judiciary in Sri Lanka.   

And just this weekend, we saw that the Bar Association of Sri Lanka and others raised concerns about the announcement of a significant number of transfers of judges and magistrates by the Judicial Services Commission.  I understand that the Bar Association has appointed a subcommittee to look into this development. 

As you might have noted, the March 21 Geneva United Nations Human Rights Council resolution also cited concern about discrimination on the basis of religion or belief.  Against this backdrop, the United States, along with many Sri Lankan citizens, is alarmed by the recent attacks on Muslim businesses and certain inflammatory calls to action.  This type of hateful sentiment must not be allowed to fester.   

The resolution also stressed the importance of the full participation of the local population, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in efforts to promote justice, reconciliation, and livelihoods. 

And, of course, the United States has expressed disappointment with the stalled progress on reconciliation and accountability since the end of the conflict in 2009.  As you know, this is the second year the U.S. has sponsored a resolution in Geneva.  Some have asked me, “why a second resolution?”  Let me explain. 

The 2012 resolution, passed by a majority of countries on the Human Rights Council, sent a clear message that the international community shared the United States’ concerns regarding the lack of progress on reconciliation and accountability.  The 2012 resolution simply asked the government of Sri Lanka to fulfill its own commitments to its people from its Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission report, and to meet its own international obligations.   

Following the 2012 resolution, the United States Government continued to raise concerns on the human rights front.  We monitored the situation throughout the country, engaged with the government when we had concerns, and offered assistance whenever we were able.   

Of course, I want to emphasize that this was just one aspect of our engagement here:  we continued our major work on economic growth and humanitarian assistance projects, exchange visitor programs, demining, and much more. 

A few months after the 2012 resolution, the government of Sri Lanka took the positive step of releasing a National Action Plan to implement its commitments regarding the recommendations of the LLRC report.  Unfortunately, the National Action Plan did not cover all the recommendations of the LLRC, just as the LLRC recommendations did not address all the outstanding issues of reconciliation and accountability.  Nevertheless, the National Action Plan included many steps that, if completed, would be helpful for the country.   

Some have complained that the desire to see real and credible progress in these areas is either unfair or unrealistic.  It is true that reconciliation and accountability are often long and complicated processes that can take years to complete.   

We understand this.  But it is important to start those processes as soon as possible, and to accomplish what it is possible quickly.  There were a number of items in the LLRC report and National Action Plan which could have, in fact, been achieved quite quickly. 

Some items were subjects of intense international scrutiny.  For example, the government accepted LLRC recommendations to investigate the killing of five students in Trincomalee in January 2006 and the killing of seventeen  “Action Against Hunger” aid workers in August of the same year.  These killings were already the subject of a commission of inquiry, but now – more than six years later – there have been no perpetrators brought to justice.  The LLRC report also maps out a path to progress on investigating enforced and involuntary disappearances.  However, the Special Commissioner to conduct these investigations has not yet been appointed.   

Even freedom of movement remains restricted, as we saw last month -- when hundreds of family members of the disappeared were blocked in Vavuniya and prevented from coming to Colombo to ask what had been done to account for their loved ones. 

I will note that the government has provided the diplomatic community with regular briefings on the status of implementing the recommendations of the LLRC National Action Plan.  We appreciate these efforts.  But, some of the most important steps in achieving real reconciliation have not yet moved ahead.  Government dialogue with the TNA on political devolution is crucial.  

It is also important to continue to return property to rightful owners and to implement a process that resolves outstanding land claims issues.  And, of course, people must not only be able to return to their homes, they must be able to return to their livelihoods as well.  That means farmers must be able to go back to their farmlands, and fisherman must be given access to the sea.  The people of the former conflict zones must be able to live their lives without interference, as do other citizens of Sri Lanka.    

So, at the beginning of 2013, the U.S. Government looked at what the government of Sri Lanka had undertaken to do under its own LLRC report.  We looked at the conditions around the country.  We compared those to the government’s commitments and stated goals.  We realized that not only were many of the concerns that led to the first resolution still there, but also, that in some ways the situation had deteriorated.   

The U.S. then consulted widely with other countries.  We found a broad consensus that the international community should remain focused on the situation in Sri Lanka.  Many countries shared concerns about the pace of reconciliation and accountability.   

Some have asked me what the U.S. means when we speak of “reconciliation” or “accountability.” 

When we say reconciliation, we mean finding a way for all Sri Lankans to live together in peace, harmony, and security in a unified country…a country in which the democratic space exists for all to be able to express their views freely, and for all to share in the prosperity of the country in terms of access to land, employment, education, and so forth.  When we say accountability, we mean, identifying those responsible for committing abuses and imposing consequences for these acts or omissions. 

Some form of credible investigation is in the interest of the government concerned.  For when there are serious allegations of human rights violations – whether a government likes it or not – those allegations will persist until they are credibly addressed.  We note reports that highlighted a Sri Lankan Army Commission of Inquiry report on actions undertaken in the final phase of the conflict.  We respectfully suggest that this report should be made public.  

As Sri Lanka moves forward from the Human Rights Council session, we will look closely at what steps the government chooses to take in response to the resolution.

This brings us back to the original question: what happens next?  I would submit that this depends on the government of Sri Lanka.  The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ report dated February 11, 2013 reaffirmed a long-standing recommendation  for “an independent and credible international investigation” into alleged violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law in Sri Lanka.  The latest resolution took note of this call, and asks the Office of the High Commissioner to update the Council on Sri Lanka’s progress at the September 2013 session and present a comprehensive report in March 2014.  The latest resolution also encourages Sri Lanka’s government to respond to the eight outstanding requests by UN special procedures mandate holders. 

As we examine next steps, we will renew our consideration of all mechanisms available, both in the Human Rights Council and beyond.  But it is important to emphasize that calls for reconciliation and accountability should not simply be seen as exhortations by the international community – reconciliation and accountability should be viewed as essential to ensuring a peaceful and prosperous future for the country.  History has shown that societies that do not adequately address reconciliation and accountability usually return to a conflict situation at some point down the road.  Thus, however difficult this process is, it is ultimately vital to the stability of Sri Lanka. 

Let me close by reiterating that while we do have concerns about some recent developments here, our relationship with the people of Sri Lanka is enduring.  At the same time that we raise the concerns I have listed just now on the human rights and democratic governance front, we continue to contribute to the development and prosperity of Sri Lanka in a wide variety of ways, every day and throughout the country. 

We continue with our academic support programs at the universities of Peradeniya, Ruhuna, and Jaffna.  We have civil society capacity building, youth empowerment, and English-language teaching programs in all regions of the country, as well as programs for the disabled.  We fund economic growth projects in the former conflict zones to expand livelihood opportunities, enhance economic productivity, and increase incomes.  We are working to revive agricultural production in the Northern Province, providing food security and support for newly resettled IDPs.  We support mine-awareness and demining programs, and work with the military on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief preparedness.  We support clean energy access and public-private alliances in aquaculture, horticulture, and industry.  We are funding the construction of a forensics lab within the Ministry of Justice. 

Last Friday, I announced U.S. support for a labor inspection system for the Sri Lankan Labor Ministry to promote worker’s rights.  Later this month, we will offer a maritime law enforcement course to the Sri Lankan Coast Guard.  We have worked with other Ministries to protect vulnerable populations, including recent funding of a women’s shelter.   

So you can see, by anyone’s standard, U.S. engagement with Sri Lanka remains robust and multifaceted.  Our US-Sri Lanka relationship is not limited to a single agenda, as some have claimed, but represents a truly multidimensional approach driven not by any short-term agenda but by long-term goals and partnerships. It is my sincere hope that this partnership with Sri Lanka can expand, even as the Human Rights Council resolution sends a strong signal from the international community that the government of Sri Lanka must do more to fulfill its obligations to its people.  

We are now approaching Avurudda, the traditional New Year, at the end of this week.  Each year, this celebration brings the hope of new beginnings and fresh promise.  It also brings an Opportunity for Sri Lanka to recommit itself to reconciliation and accountability, and making sure all can enjoy a lasting peace.  Thank you, and I welcome any comments or questions you might have. 

Land and sea confiscation, Mullai people in anguish. An entreaty to President tomorrow, elucidating the situation. Appeal to provide facilities for resettled persons.

Tuesday , 09 April 2013

 Resettled people are severely perturbed due to continuous land grabbing and sea confiscation activities occurring in the Mullaitheevu district.

Due to this activity their rights are violated and livelihoods have got drastically affected, and the destitute people decided to lodge a complaint concerning this to President Mahinda Rajapakse.

A petition appealing for  immediate cease activities of such confiscations will be forwarded tomorrow Wednesday to President.

A decision had been taken to bring this issue to the attention of President, and it would be forwarded said Karaithuraipattru village development federation and women development federation Chairman K.Ravikaran.

Ravikaran further said, the displaced people during war are now resettled in the coastal line areas of Mullaitheevu are facing crisis, and concerning this an entreaty would be submitted to President Mahinda Rajapakse on behalf of Karaithuraipattu divisional village development federation and women village development federation.

The petition would be forwarded through Mullaitheevu Government Agent tomorrow Wednesday.

Housing facilities completely fulfilled to the entire affected persons by war in the Mullaitheevu district. Majority of the affected persons in this district were not successful for the assistance granted by the Indian housing project.

This has massively affected the resettlement people. Hence to uplift their livelihoods,   loan assistance with reduced interest or relief should be granted.

Fresh water fishing was carried out in the Kokillai, Nayaru, Vattuvagal and Nanthikadal regions. Southern Sri Lankan fishermen are intruding illegally are engaged in fishing in prohibited methods which has affected our livelihoods.  Towards this activity, the forces are side assistance to this sector.

Activities should be advanced to impede this activity.  We did cultivation from ancestry in  Kokkuthoduvai, Kokkilai, Karunattukerni, Kumulamunai, Semmalai and Alampil areas but now our lands are getting grabbed or not permitted for entry,  reasoning out security purpose. Hence we have lost a considerable amount of agriculture lands which has caused livelihoods crisis said Ravikaran.

Students showered in dust in Kilinochchi

Tuesday , 09 April 2013

Road restorations are carried out in Kilinochchi town, and students are showered with dust when they reach their schools in the morning. They are also suffering from respiratory diseases.

Road repairs  from the  depot junction to Kanagapuram is dragging for a prolonged period, hence students are daily facing  severe hardships.

Students attending schools at Kanagapuram Maha Vidyalayam, Central College, Kilinochchi Maha Vidyalayam, St.Thiresa Ladies College are daily covered with dust which is a normal practice. People appeal to expedite the road restoration work.

Tuesday , 09 April 2013