Bahrain's "Blogfather" emerges from hiding

By Jason Stern/CPJ Middle East and North Africa Research Associate

Ali Abdel Imam (AP/Hasan Jamali)

For two years, Bahrainis have been asking "Where is Ali Abdel Imam?" And now finally, they have an answer.

The prominent opposition blogger suddenly emergedfrom hiding last week, announcing he had been granted asylum in the United Kingdom, news sources reported. 

He had not been heard from since March 17, 2011, when he cryptically tweeted, "I get tired from my phone so I switched it of no need for rumors plz." The Bahraini government had just declared a state of emergency, as massive reform protests rocked the island country. Abdel Imam, who had already been arrested twice before for his work, feared the government would arrest him again in an impending crackdown. So when they came for him the following day, Abdel Imam made sure he wasn't there. He had not been heard from since--until last week.

The story of Abdel Imam's escape from Bahrain, as reported by The Atlantic, reads like a Hollywood script, complete with outlandish plots involving body doubles, code names, and secret compartments. The news electrified the Bahraini opposition and human rights defenders across the region. His first tweet since his disappearance, simply reading "online," was retweeted 257 times and favorited 74 times.

There was one group clearly not entertained by the news: the Bahraini government. In astatement to CNN, the government accused Abdel Imam of "inciting and encouraging continuous acts of violent attacks against police officers."  The government also expressed its surprise that "certain NGOs have taken it as their mission to aid and abet fugitives from justice."

In the strictest sense of the term, Abdel Imam is in fact a fugitive. In June 2011, Abdel Imam was sentenced in absentia to 15 years imprisonment for attempting to overthrow the regime by an extraordinary tribunal established under martial law. Some of his co-defendants--bloggers, activists, and opposition politicians--received life sentences.

In April the following year, CPJ was one of 50 human rights and press freedom groups that sent a letter to King Hamad bin Issa Al-Khalifa in support of Abdel Imam and his 20 co-defendants--all convicted for their political beliefs and activism.

Despite such pressure, a civilian court upheld Abel Imam's convictions in September 2012. At the time, CPJ slammed the court decision, and our executive director, Joel Simon, said, "The expression of critical opinion is protected by international law and can never be a crime."

As such, Abdel Imam is not so much a fugitive as an opposition voice in exile. The U.K.'s decision to grant Abdel Imam asylum indicates the British too believe the charges against him amount to political persecution.

The Bahraini government makes clear in its statement to CNN that it considers Abdel Imam a serious threat to security, explaining he is the"founder of Bahrain Online, a website that has repeatedly been used to incite hatred."

To be sure, anger towards the government is readily apparent on Bahrain Online. Founded almost 15 years ago, Bahrain Online became a central hub for opposition voices, hosting blogs and an immensely popular discussion forum. With opposition voices largely excluded from the traditional press, dissent in Bahrain went digital years before YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook. Abdel Imam became known as the "Blogfather of Bahrain," and he helped pave the way for netizens across the Arab world to establish their own blogs and online forums.

As the hope of the 2011 Pearl Revolution devolved into repression and street clashes, anger in some corners of the opposition grew. Today, a banner on Bahrain Online reads "No dialogue with you" next to a picture of a vampiric King Hamad and a massive fireball. Some threads now discuss how to battle riot police in actions described by the posters as self-defense. The government calls such operations--usually involving molotov cocktails, stones, and iron rods--acts of terror.

Yet such posts apparently came from website users and not Abdel Imam, who was in hiding, and they are essentially part of an ongoing intra-opposition debate over how to seek change in Bahrain. In an interview with Al-Jazeera last week, Abdel Imam blamed the increase of violence by protesters on the regime "because they didn't provide any proper channel for change."

Asked about his new life in exile, Abdel Imam told Al-Jazeera, "I didn't plan it, but if it's the price of the freedom for my country and for the people I love to have their rights then I'm willing to pay." Separated from his family, at least now Abdel Imam is safe, physically and legally--unlike so many journalists and activists still in Bahrain.  

Just yesterday, a Bahraini court jailed six people for insulting King Hamad on Twitter, and another court once again delayed the trial of photographer Ahmed Humaidan, accused of "using violence to assault police" after he covered anti-government demonstrations. In the past month, three international journalists were asked to leave the country for covering unrest coinciding with a major Formula One race, and police continued to harass professional photographers working for outlets like The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse, and others.

Not everyone under threat can choose exile. Now, the opposition voices that remain will at least once again have an essential advocate to amplify their message.

Jason Stern, research associate for CPJ’s Middle East and North Africa program, has a master’s in Middle East Studies from George Washington University and a bachelor’s in government from Cornell University.

Nigel Farage barricaded in Scottish pub and rescued by police riot van

Nigel Farage has been barricaded by police in a pub before being whisked away in a riot van after his visit to Scotland was hijacked by hard-Left independence supporters.

By Simon Johnson, Scottish Political Editor

16 May 2013

TELEGRAPH.CO.UK

The Ukip leader was left stranded in the middle of Edinburgh’s Royal Mile, surrounded by around 50 nationalists and socialists calling him a racist, but demanding that he: “Go home to England”.

Police officers attempted to persuade two taxi drivers to take Mr Farage away from the trouble but both refused as the protesters continued to barrack the MEP with chants of “racist Nazi scum”.

A shaken Mr Farage told reporters: “We have never had a reception like this anywhere in Britain before. Clearly, it’s anti-British and anti-English. They hate the Union Jack.”

Police officers then insisted for his own safety that he enter the Canon’s Gait pub, the wooden doors of which were then locked.

The protesters continued to jeer and shout abuse, with some unveiling a 20ft banner that, referring to next year’s referendum, stated: “Vote Yes for Scotland”.

Others among the mostly young crowd serenaded Mr Farage by telling him where he should “stick your Union Jack”.

It was not clear how the stand-off would end, with some enterprising nationalists disappearing round the back of the building to check Mr Farage did not sneak out the rear entrance.

One wag joked that the Ukip leader would have to come out for a cigarette sooner or later. However, a Lothian and Borders Police riot van was spotted making its way up the usually genteel Royal Mile and stopped directly outside the pub.

After a delay of around ten minutes, the doors opened and the crowd surged forward while police ‘kettled’ Mr Farage from the building and into the vehicle safely.

The protesters cheered as the vehicle sped away. The Ukip leader could be seen behind the grilled windows speaking on his mobile phone.

Speaking in a radio interview afterwards, he said: “Normally I would love to be locked in a pub, but it was pretty unpleasant. If this is the face of Scottish nationalism, it’s a pretty ugly picture.

“This was dressed up as an anti-racism protest but it was nothing of the sort – it was anti-English thing.” Mr Farage said the protesters were “not prepared to have a conversation” and praised the police, saying the situation could have turned “very nasty” if they had not been present.

He was visiting the Royal Mile to meet the Scottish press, but some Left-wing nationalists and socialists discovered the arrangements and posted them on their Twitter accounts.

They included members of Radical Independence, a representative of which shared a platform with Nicola Sturgeon, the Deputy First Minister, at the launch of the official Yes Scotland campaign in Glasgow.

The trouble started when Mr Farage was speaking to television, radio and newspaper reporters in the Canon’s Gait about his hopes of replicating UKIP’s English success in Scotland.

About a dozen protesters entered the pub only to find their target surrounded by journalists and photographers. They appeared upset that they could not get to their quarry but as the interviews continued grew increasingly restless.

Mr Farage initially attempted to debate with them, denying vehemently that his party is racist or had any links with the British National Party. However, they responded with increasingly vitriolic abuse.

As the protesters started chanting and singing, the pub’s management asked everyone to leave, forcing Mr Farage onto the street and giving his team a major problem in trying to extricate him.

Before the trouble started, the Ukip leader told reporters his hopes of making a breakthrough in Scotland had been improved by next year's independence referendum.

“The SNP is selling an entirely false prospectus to the people of Scotland. They talked about independence within the European Union – don’t make me laugh,” he said.

“If the SNP position was they wanted to be out of the United Kingdom and out of the European Union, at least intellectually, you could respect that position.”

He said the independence debate has prompted a discussion on EU membership, saying: “We’ve got some things to say about how Scotland might be outside the European Union with a reinvigorated fishing industry. There’s a gap in the political market for Ukip in Scotland that didn’t exist last year.”

But Mr Farage admitted the “immigration argument” was not as potent in Scotland because there has not been the same influx of foreigners north of the Border as in the south of England.

The Ukip leader, who is standing a candidate in Aberdeen Donside by-election for the Scottish Parliament, said he favoured the wholesale devolution of tax powers to Holyrood.

A spokesman for Yes Scotland said: "We had no knowledge nor any involvement in this incident. Yes Scotland seeks to run a positive campaign, and we would condemn any form of intimidation."

A spokesman for Radical Independence Edinburgh said: “Farage came up to Scotland to spread his racism and bigotry here – we showed he's not welcome.

"His party Ukip have always achieved a derisory vote in Scotland but Farage thought that could change after their recent local elections successes in England.

"In 2014 we finally have the chance to get rid of the political system at Westminster that pours fuel onto the bigoted fire of Farage and Ukip Scotland wants to be a country that welcomes immigrants – but we need independence to make that desire a reality."

Sally has been released! But now the lying game starts

16/05/2013

Click here to join the campaign against the Summit in Colombo.

Kind regards,

--
The Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice

http://srilankacampaign.org

You can donate to the campaign here

The Spectre Haunting The Rajapaksas

By Tisaranee Gunasekara -May 16, 2013

“Never will tyrants freely consent to the extirpation of servitude….” - Thomas Raynal[i]

Of all the spectres the Rajapaksas fear, Oppositional-unity would arguably be the most terrifying.

The Rajapaksas began getting jittery when it became evident that the May 15^th demonstration against the electricity hike would be supported by both the UNP and the JVP. The usual bag of tricks was deployed: the shrill screams about undead-Tigers, incoherent rumblings about NGO-cum-international conspiracies; and a hastily organised counter-demonstration.

None of the ploys worked; the demonstration on the 15^th was a success. If the UNP and the JVP continue their cooperation and the plantation workers join in, the token strike on May 21^st too can become equally successful. And these twin successes might inject some much needed life into the Opposition and help inculcate the habit of cooperation in the oppositional ranks.

The Siblings would know that one demonstration and one token strike, however successful, is no threat to their power in the here and now. But the Rajapaksa project is an epochal one; therefore they regard even long term threats with a certain degree of immediacy and urgency.

A dispirited and a disunited opposition is a sine qua non for the continuance of Familial rule. If the Siblings look at this rare moment of oppositional unity and see in it a microcosm of a certain unhappy future, they would be correct.

In the coming days, the Rajapaksas will redouble their efforts to ensure that the token strike is a failure. They will try to induce oppositional disunity; they will use propaganda with a heavy hand and engage in targeted acts of repression. If the opposition can withstand all these, an important politico-psychological threshold would have been reached and breached.

There is a pithy Sinhala proverb which can be translated, inelegantly, as ‘one does not pluck a honeycomb just to lick one’s fingers’ – meaning when a man attempts a difficult/dangerous task, he does so in anticipation of ample reward. The LTTE took on the Lankan state not to create a Tamil Eelam but to create a Tiger Eelam. Similarly the Rajapaksas successfully took on the task of defeating the LTTE not to create a unitary Sri Lanka but to create a unitary Sri Lanka under Rajapaksa rule. Their plan was to defeat the Tigers militarily, without making any political concessions to the Tamils, thereby winning the eternal gratitude of the Sinhalese and, as a mark of that gratitude, their freely given consent for long term Familial Rule.

Economics is the serpent in this land the Rajapaksas promised to themselves.

The electricity hike is not the work of Treasury Secretary PB Jayasundara, Minister Pavithra Wanniarachchi or the Public Utilities Commission. The huge rates-hike obviously had Presidential approval; it was certainly motivated by the Rajapaksa need to extract the maximum from the public (it may also have been a conditionality imposed by the IMF for a new loan).

Clearly the regime thought that the opposition was too busy navel-gazing to take up this issue with the vigour it deserved; and that media/public attention could be diverted with artificial crises, such as the Muslim threat (including the unjust arrest of Azath Salley) and political pantomimes, such as the curious case of Duminda Silva.

Excess has become a Rajapaksa habit; indulgence a norm The electricity hike could have been handled with more finesse, but the Siblings have got away with so many economic hammer-blows they did not see any need to use a scalpel this time. That perhaps was their main miscalculation. The hike was so crudely gigantic, that it gave the lie to Rajapaksa rhetoric about developmental miracles in a way that no amount of oppositional propaganda could.

Unravelling Rajapaksa Lies

Lies and dissembling, false promises and mendacious declarations, illusions and delusions form the bedrock of Rajapaksa governance. The Siblings are master-illusionists; they excel at using words to create a totally unreal counter-reality. They did that when they called the Fourth Eelam War a ‘humanitarian operation with zero-civilian casualties’ and open prison camps ‘welfare centres’; they did it when they called the 18^thAmendment a democratic measure, the Impeachment travesty a legal recourse and the arrest of Gen.Fonseka a patriotic act.

They are implementing a similar hoax when they hail their particular concoction of state-capitalism and economic neo-liberalism as ‘progressive economics’ and ‘pro-people development’. That lie has worked so far and will continue to work, in fits and starts, for a while more. But the electricity hike, thanks to its chainsaw-like effect, has caused an unprecedented dent in the hitherto smooth façade of Rajapaksa developmental-lies.

Given the nature of the Rajapaksa project, the Siblings have no choice but to continue to impose economic burdens on the masses. The huge outlay on defence must be maintained to ensure the survival of familial rule; megalomaniac projects must go ahead to satisfy the family’s desire for glory.

So the Rajapaksas have to continue their policy of tax and borrow, even at the cost of causing Southern discontent. Creating a fear psychosis by demonising minorities and equating legitimate, democratic and peaceful acts of opposition with treachery constitute their way out of this conundrum. They want an unthinking, uncritical mass; a stupid mass incapable of seeing the obvious and willing to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear to facts.

Trying to ignore or gloss over facts in order to maintain the inviolability of a belief is a practice which is neither new nor uncommon. When the geo-centric model of universe pioneered by Ptolemy and embraced by the Catholic Church failed to fit in with the observable planetary movements, instead of ditching the model, the theory of epicycles was added to it, to bridge the gap between Biblical theory and cosmic reality.

So far the Sinhala South has opted to accept the Rajapaksa myth about a dawning developmental miracle. But as shocks akin to – and worse than – the electricity hike accumulate it will be harder for the South to ignore the truth – living conditions cannot improve, so long as the rulers spend scarce resources on defence and on such wasteful projects as the Mattala airport or the Commonwealth Summit.

A Sinhala South capable of removing its ‘patriotic-blinkers’ and seeing the world for what it is would be the worst Rajapaksa nightmare. The Rajapaksa-days would be numbered if and when the Sinhala South asks itself whether it makes sense to spend the largest chunk of national income on defence, in the absence of a war; or why 40 million rupees should be spent annually on maintaining a category of individuals called ‘senior ministers’; or even ponder the connection between the dispossession of the Sinhala villages of Ampara and the Tamil villages of Jaffna.

Is having a mammoth cabinet in national interest? Is giving those innumerable ministers uncountable perks/privileges in national interest? Is allowing the powerful to ignore/break the law with impunity in public interest? Is wasting borrowed money on airports, harbours and other prestige projects which bring very little benefit to the county, economy or the people in national interest?

A people capable of seeing and hearing, questioning and understanding; a united opposition: for the Rajapaksas that would be hell, incarnate.

---

[i] Quoted in ‘A Revolution of the Mind’ by Jonathan Israel

Statement On Annual Tamil Memorial Week

16 May 2013

The following is a statement by Ontario PC Leader Tim Hudak on Annual Tamil Memorial Week:

“As Leader of the Ontario PC Caucus, I would like to join the province’s Tamil-Canadian community in observing the fourth anniversary of the end of the decades-long civil war in Sri Lanka.

“Annual Tamil Memorial Week ensures we never forget the innocent civilians who were killed during the war, including the tens of thousands of people who died during the last weeks leading up to May 18, 2009. It also gives us the opportunity to once again demand accountability for those who died, the families still living in the country, and their loved ones abroad.

“Ontario is home to the largest diaspora community of Sri Lankan Tamils in the world, many of whom chose to build new lives here in order to escape the imminent danger of the war. In doing so, the community has enriched our province’s cultural and economic landscape, while continuing to advocate for justice.

“These efforts have led to a greater awareness around the world of the struggles still facing civilians in Sri Lanka, and the need for continued vigilance in order to stop human rights abuses.

“I’m proud that my federal conservative counterparts – Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird in particular – have taken a strong stance on this issue. We also have two Ontario PC candidates from our Tamil Canadian community, Ken Kirupa for Scarborough-Guildwood and Shan Thayaparan for Markham-Unionville, who are not only successful businessmen and leaders, but also strong advocates for accountability and justice.

“Once again I would like to extend my support to the Canadian Tamil community as you observe this solemn occasion, and thank the National Council of Canadian Tamils for their work with this year’s annual memorial week.”

Tamil Memorial Week 2013 - Ontario PC Leader

The master and his puppets: Some comments on ‘Tamil Moderates’

16 MAY 2013

BY KRISNA SARAVANAMUTTU & KARTHICK RM

Around Geneva, the Rajapaksa regime and its mercenaries raise some self-righteous noise against the ‘neo-colonialists’ in the West. Quarters in the US-led West, tired with Rajapaksa’s intransigence wrt the human rights situation in the island and his supposed inability to provide a stable liberal democratic regime, have been releasing this report and that resolution criticizing the current state of affairs in the island. This contradiction will grow. The US will get angry with Sri Lanka for being unable to provide stability. Its natural allies then will be the Tamils, who are inherently free-market capitalists. And voila, you will have Tamil Eelam on a platter. 

Or so some Tamil pundits in the West fantasize. And thus, they believe that it is in the best interest of the Tamil nation to adopt the narrative of ‘reconciliation and accountability’ that is chanted as a prayer in the hallways of Geneva. You don’t want to disappoint your large hearted allies after all.

We wish we could share such colorful dreams, but realpolitik is sadly very sober and requires a ratiocination of the most rigorous kind. Trust ‘Taraki’ Sivaram, senior editor of TamilNet and military analyst, an exemplar of parrhesia, the courage to speak truth to power, and who was assassinated for the same virtue. 

In the feature he was working on at the time of his death, ‘US’s strategic interests in Sri Lanka’, noting the defense cooperation between US-Sri Lanka, Sivaram argued that “Stabilizing the Sri Lanka state was considered critical for the US at this juncture to consolidate and cement its strategic interests here. The LTTE was a stubborn impediment to achieving this end – particularly the constant threat to Trincomalee and Palaly. Containing the Liberation Tigers and making them more malleable were also identified as priorities.”

A year later, the west managed peace process collapsed, LTTE was criminalized in Europe under US-UK pressure, and Sri Lanka got a free hand to continue its war on the Tamil nation to the best of its potential. And oh, the Sri Lanka signed the Acquisition and Cross Service Agreement with the USA in 2007, a deal to secure exchanges in logistical support, supplies and services. On another front, the Tamil diaspora was extensively studied by US based defense corporations like RAND in studies like the 2001 publication “Trends in Outside Support for Insurgent Movements” or the 2007 article by William Rosenau ‘Subversion and Insurgency’, where the author describes the LTTE as “Subversion on five continents”.i The internationally coordinated COIN ops against the Tamil struggle that led to the climax of the genocidal war in 2009 have been discussed earlier.

But why criticize American concern for human rights now?  Doesn’t Uncle Sam have a heart after all?

In his feature referred above, Sivaram had said “The ‘management’ of the ethnic conflict, among other things, is also important for the US to “sufficiently” expand and consolidate its military and intelligence relations with Sri Lanka as an important security partner in the region.”

One portion of this ‘management’ was the internationally coordinated war on the LTTE. And the US is pretty honest on this - Ambassador Michelle Sison in an event in Sri Lanka on March 2013 affirmed “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”. She also talked about reconciliation and accountability.

Moreover, to properly analyze the current American engagement with the Tamil liberation struggle, we must objectively establish the history of US engagement with the island’s politics.  To this end, Jeffrey Lunstead, former US Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, provides an insider’s perspective in his report The United States’ Role in Sri Lanka’s Peace Process. Though the US publicly espoused its support to a politically negotiated solution, in actuality it provided a “commitment to strengthening the Sri Lankan Armed Forces”.ii The American strategy marginalized the LTTE in the international arena (i.e. maintaining the LTTE on the Foreign Terrorist Organization list, excluding the LTTE from the Washington Donor Conference) and intensified the US military-to-military relationship with the Sri Lankan government.

Mahinda Rajapaksa was sworn in on 19th November 2006. Two days later Under Secretary Burns said “We also believe that the Tamil Tigers, the LTTE, is a terrorist group responsible for massive bloodshed in the country and we hold the Tamil Tigers responsible for much of what has gone wrong in the country. We are not neutral in this respect. We support the government”.iii

The Americans provided the Sri Lankans with training, education, and weapons infrastructure. The US played a key role in cutting off the LTTE’s own financial networks yet it handed over millions in foreign military funding to the Sri Lankan government. And Paul Moorcraft, a British military analyst, in his recent book on the war in the island notes the level of assistance that the US gave to Sri Lanka, including the advice to use cluster bombs against the Tamil population.iv All this while the US insisted that it sought to deter war and not encourage it.

The other portion of this ‘management’ is best observed at, what one diaspora grassroots activist so poignantly termed, ‘the Geneva thiruvizha’. Introducing the US sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka, 2013. No talk on Tamil nationhood. No talk on Tamil genocide. No mention even of the word ‘Tamil’. But yes, “reconciliation and accountability.”

In order to pacify the Diaspora, the backers of US based resolution give the false impression that it is against Sri Lanka and its adoption would somehow benefit the Tamils. The resolution, whose only implicit reference to the Tamil struggle is ‘terrorism’, harps on reconciliation and the LLRC as a solution to the ongoing conflict. The undeniable fact, however, is that the LLRC was conceived as an escape route for Sri Lanka. When legitimate criticism does emerge about the LLRC based approach, the knee jerk reaction of its lobbyists is to simply argue that the UNHRC resolution is a ‘first step.’ A fine ‘first step’ indeed. Towards a political disaster, perhaps.

After the Mullivaaykaal genocide, Sivaram’s analysis of COIN remains critical to assessing American engagement with the Tamil Diaspora. A key COIN tactic Sivaram addressed was “the promotion and propagation of the conceptual/political dichotomy of the moderate and the militant/terrorist”.v Today the Diaspora seems to be a target in US COIN strategy, wherein “the global proscription regime is an institutional, structural violence which criminalizes diaspora politics and affective connections to the idea of Tamil Eelam”.vi  Unfortunately, some sections of the Tamil lobby Diaspora developed selective amnesia regarding US intervention to tilt the parity of status earned by the Tamils in favor of the Sri Lankan war machinery.

First, any serious observer of the Tamil Liberation struggle cannot deny the role played by the global Tamil Diaspora. After all, it was the same Diaspora that was criminalized through the US led proscription of the LTTE in the western world due to its moral, political and economic support of the liberation struggle. The U.S. Army & Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual 3-24 (2007) advises, “Victory is achieved when the populace consents to the government’s legitimacy and stops actively and passively supporting the insurgency”. Thus, to establish victory over the Tamil independence struggle on the international front, the Tamil Diaspora must be conceptually and politically demobilized from its primary objective.

The pro US lobbyists may argue that the Americans looked away in a ‘war without witnesses.’ The sad truth, as seen above, is that the Americans and their allies provided the weapons and the diplomatic cover for Sri Lanka to commit the 2009 genocide. The defeat of the LTTE and the 2009 genocide are an example of what Herman and Peterson called a “constructive genocide” that served the major US interests of stabilizing the island by getting rid of the stubborn LTTE impediment.

With the defeat of the military force of Tamil independence, the US fixed its aims on the Diaspora political force by seeking to reshape and moderate the terms of the debate. Classical COIN theorists like Galula have stressed the importance of the counterinsurgent to work on appropriating and diluting the cause of the insurgent so as to eradicate support while contemporary theorists like Kilcullen have stressed the importance of creating an alternate narrative that excludes the narrative of the insurgent.

To distort and dilute the cause of the Tamil liberation struggle, the LLRC based approach is attempting to change and moderate the debate from sovereignty, freedom, and self-determination to accommodation, integration and co-existence, thus moderating the perception of the oppressed about the conflict rather than helping end the system of oppression itself. The debate shifts from genocide and national liberation to individual human rights problems and political devolution, which can be rectified under a more liberal, democratic Sri Lankan regime.  A recent TamilNet feature raised a question whether resolutions and HR reports that fail to recognize genocide or Tamil sovereign nationhood is the other side of a coin where military minds hail the ‘Sri Lanka model’ as a successful addition to COIN theory.

The lobbyists in favor of the US resolution are given the bait of political recognition while those who reject it on principled grounds are deemed as radicals and leftists. The ‘moderates’ are seen to be effective because they can invite their political masters in the west to their meetings and engage in photo ops with them. Yet, the ‘moderates’ can only beg for scraps of justice from their masters but remain powerless to halt, challenge or even address western complicity in the structural and protracted genocide that the Tamil homeland endures.

Why does this same lobby not reject the US approach and demand a more concrete political program of an international investigation and a referendum to establish a sovereign Tamil Eelam? Hair-splitting and claims of being pragmatic aside, the answer is that the pro-US lobby will lose its utility in the eyes of its political superiors at the US State Department. Some take up the ‘reconciliation for all citizens’ narrative as conscious agents, getting perks, grants, and funding. Others do it as unconscious agents, in the best of intentions that by bending over backwards, the world powers will pay heed to Tamil suffering and deliver justice. Either way, the effect is the same.

Of course, the liberal lobbyist brigades will argue that they are keenly aware of the broader strategy at play. These ‘moderates’ insist that they are politically savvy and clever enough to navigate through the western agenda and secure Tamil liberation. Sadly, it is one thing to think like an American and an entirely different thing to think the way the American wants you to think. Confused and impotent, they forget that the dog can wag the tail but the tail can never wag the dog.

Through the use of a resolution that is impotent as far as the Tamil nation is concerned and reports that do not address the crucial questions facing the Tamil nation, the US is pushing for a more user-friendly regime in Colombo. Emphasizing the paradigm of human rights and reconciliation over liberation and justice will in the end only help Sri Lanka rehabilitate itself in the world when a more liberal regime takes over from Rajapaksa.

Like the butchers Pinochet, Pol Pot or the recent Efrain Rios Montt, it can be argued that the US may someday discard Rajapaksa when his usefulness to them is over - or it may not. Rajapaksa’s personal fortunes or misfortunes are of no concrete concern to the Tamil nation. The point is whether Tamil Eelam is to be or not to be. And those who choose to obscure it are by definition against it. It is that simple.

But do puppets ever see the strings attached?

Krisna Saravanamuttu serves as spokesperson for National Council of Canadian Tamils and a founding member of the Coalition for Tamil Rights. Karthick RM is a research scholar at the University of Essex, UK

UK Sikh group calls for solidarity in anti-genocide rallies

[TamilNet, Thursday, 16 May 2013, 08:04 GMT]
1984 Genocide Coalition, a UK based Sikh group, has called for solidarity among diasporic Sikhs and Tamils for anti-genocide rallies on 18 May and 9 June in a release on Thursday. Stating that such protests “are an opportunity for these heroic struggling nations to unite their power of protest and unite their campaign resources”, the release further said that “the enduring, courageous struggles of Tamil and Sikh peoples against brutal states like Sri Lanka and India; epitomise the struggle of small nations around the world.” The activists from the Coalition and Nations Without States further urged small nations across the world to unite in a common movement for global justice and freedom. 

“The struggles of the Tamils, Sikhs, Baluch, Tuareg, Tibetan, Kashmiri, Sindhi, Sikkim, West Papuan, Karen, Catalan, Basque, Kurd: represent a sample of the huge and diverse, global spread of liberation movements across the world for true democractic self-determination, people recognition, empowered and self-government,” the statement said.

Criticizing big states for their violent repression of nations, the statement further said “Nations were not born to be suppressed and subjugated and locked and subordinated to big states. They were born gradually, organically and naturally out of historic struggles; to share, contribute and input as equals into regional and global affairs. Our struggles are for a truly democratic world, which is composed of a plurality of true, natural nations.”

The name of the ‘1984 Genocide Coalition’ is derived from the memory of Operation Blue Star and anti-Sikh pogroms that happened in the year 1984. 

Operation Blue Star was an Indian military operation against pro-Khalistan Sikh rebels from 3-8 June 1984, which involved the storming of the Golden Temple in Amritsar. The Golden Temple is considered to be the holiest Sikh shrine. 

The military operation is criticized by several Sikh and independent human rights sources to have involved hundreds of civilian casualties, besides physical destruction to the Golden Temple. 

Likewise, the 1984 mass pogroms against the Sikhs organized by Congress party led mobs in several parts of North India followed the assassination of Indira Gandhi in October that year.

It is estimated that over 11,000 Sikhs perished in the massacres, with over 3000 being killed in the Indian capital New Delhi alone. 

Several Congress leaders who were known to have been active participants in the pogroms are still in high positions in the party.

There Will Be Consequences If The Conduct Of The Sri Lankan Authorities Does Not Change – Nick Clegg

May 16, 2013 

“I think that we all accept the controversy and unease about this matter, but by attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Sri Lanka we will be using the opportunity to cast a spotlight on the unacceptable abuses there. As I said earlier, of course there will be consequences if the conduct of the Sri Lankan authorities does not change. The Commonwealth matters to us all, and it is based on a number of values.” Nick Clegg the Deputy Prime Minister of the UK said today.

Nick Clegg made above remarks at the Prime Minister’s Questionstoday. As David Cameron is currently overseas, PMQ’s was conducted by Nick Clegg. The questions and answers from Hansard are available below.

Simon Hughes (Bermondsey and Old Southwark) (LD):

I have to tell my friend that I cannot support the decision of the Prime Minister to go to the Commonwealth Heads of Government conference in Sri Lanka because of the human rights record of the Sri Lankan Government. What can the Deputy Prime Minister tell us about how we can respond to that terrible regime’s record? What can we do to make sure that in future the Commonwealth does not just say it believes in human rights, but does something about it?

The Deputy Prime Minister:

We are all aware that the decision that the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary will attend the upcoming Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Sri Lanka is controversial, especially in the light of the despicable human rights violations during the recent civil war. But I assure my right hon. Friend that the Government condemn those violations, the way in which political trials, regular assaults on legal professionals and suppression of press freedom continue, and the fact that too many recommendations of the lessons learnt and reconciliation commission have not been implemented. If such violations continue, and if the Sri Lankan Government continue to ignore their international commitments in the lead up to the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, of course there will be consequences.

Siobhain McDonagh (Mitcham and Morden) (Lab):

In answer to the question the right hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Simon Hughes) asked on Sri Lanka, the Deputy Prime Minister gave a long list of atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan Government. Why, then, are his Government going to the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Sri Lanka, why are they announcing that six months ahead of time, and why do they want to see an alleged war criminal as Chair of the Commonwealth?

The Deputy Prime Minister:

I think that we all accept the controversy and unease about this matter, but by attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Sri Lanka we will be using the opportunity to cast a spotlight on the unacceptable abuses there. As I said earlier, of course there will be consequences if the conduct of the Sri Lankan authorities does not change. The Commonwealth matters to us all, and it is based on a number of values. Where I accept the hon. Lady’s implicit criticism is in relation to this point: all Commonwealth Governments should do more to not only talk about those values, but ensure that they are properly monitored and enforced.

UK warns Sri Lanka on abuses before Commonwealth summit

LONDON | Wed May 15, 2013 9:28pm IST

(Reuters) - Britain said on Wednesday there would be "consequences" for Sri Lanka if its leaders did not address international concerns over human rights abuses, ahead of a Commonwealth summit scheduled to be held in Colombo in November.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg told parliament "despicable human rights violations" had taken place in Sri Lanka, but that Britain still planned to attend the Commonwealth meeting there, a stance that has drawn heavy criticism from rights groups.

Sri Lanka has repeatedly rejected calls for an independent, international investigation into accusations of war crimes committed during the war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam that ended in May 2009.

Tens of thousands of civilians, mostly Tamils, were killed in the final months of the war, a U.N. panel has said.

"All of us accept the controversy around this, accept the unease around this, but what we'll be doing by attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka is using the opportunity to cast a spotlight on the unacceptable abuses in Sri Lanka," Clegg said.

"Of course there will be consequences if there is not a change in conduct of the Sri Lankan authorities," added Clegg, standing in for Prime Minister David Cameron during parliament's weekly question and answer session.

Britain's Foreign Office was not immediately available to outline what consequences Clegg was referring to.

Sri Lankan government officials have repeatedly rejected accusations of human rights violations.

Cameron and Foreign Secretary William Hague are expected to attend the bi-annual Commonwealth meeting, and in a break with tradition, Prince Charles will represent Queen Elizabeth, who usually attends but is now, aged 87, cutting down on long-distance travel.

The summit is a meeting of leaders mostly from former British colonies, where issues including trade, development and human rights are discussed.

As well as human rights violations, Clegg said media freedom had been suppressed and legal professionals attacked.

Last month, Human Rights Watch called on the summit to be shifted from Sri Lanka, warning the Commonwealth will face "ridicule" if the meeting goes ahead.

Amnesty International has said Sri Lanka is intensifying a crackdown on critics, creating a "climate of fear", an accusation the Sri Lankan government rejected.

(Reporting by Mohammed Abbas; Editing by Alison Williams)