Russia 'targets CIA-trained militants' in Syria

THURSDAY 01 OCTOBER 2015
Russian air strikes in Syria are targeting Free Syrian Army recruits trained by the CIA, US Senator senate John McCain has said.

Speaking to CNN about the Russian-led air strikes in Syria, Mr McCain said: "I can absolutely confirm to you that they were strikes against our Free Syrian Army recruits that have been armed and trained by the CIA because we have communications with people there."

He claims Russian forces targeted the US-backed rebel group, who are opponents of Russian ally Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Hassan Haj Ali, head of the Liwa Suqour al-Jabal rebel group told Reuters that two Russian air strikes hit the group's training camp in Idlib province. He said the rebel group received military training from the CIA in Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

"Russia is challenging everyone and saying there is no alternative to Bashar," Haj Ali said. He said the Russian jets had been identified by members of his group who once served as Syrian air force pilots.

Russia launched a series of air strikes in the Homs and Hama provinces on Wednesday, claiming they were targeting Islamic State (IS) militants.

Russia said it launched eight air strikes overnight, hitting four IS targets. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported that more than 30 civilians were killed, including women and children.

The US and other western allies have raised concerns that Russia hit areas which were not held by IS rebels and are not targeting the militants.

New reports have emerged suggesting that hundreds of Iranian forces arrived in Syria 10 days ago with weapons to take part in a group operation in conjunction with Russia.

Now, in a second day of air strikes, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said he plans to coordinate his actions in Syria with the US.

Despite this, the Russian Foreign Ministry said it does not intend joining a US-led coalition in the fight against IS militants. It would however, consider a request from Iraq to conduct air strikes against IS inside Iraq.

China’s 3,000-Acre Aircraft Carriers Could Change the Balance of Power in the Pacific

BY JAMES STAVRIDIS-OCTOBER 1, 2015

The Great Wall, as President Richard Nixon so elegantly said on his first trip to Beijing in 1972, was indeed a “great wall.” Nearly half a century later, a new Great Wall is under construction by China — what Adm. Harry Harris, the commander of U.S. military forces throughout the Pacific, hasfamously called a “Great Wall Of Sand.” That wall, unfortunately, is not so great.

Instead of stone, brick, and wood, this new wall consists of artificial islands strung out across the South China Sea — a region Beijing claims by virtue of historical right. China’s claim is encompassed by what it terms the “nine-dash line,” a radical demarcation of maritime sovereignty that takes an enormous bite out of the legitimate territorial claims of Vietnam, the Philippines, and other countries ringing the South China Sea.

The crucial context of this behavior is that the South China Sea — Asia’s “cauldron,” as geostrategist Robert D. Kaplan calls it — is bubbling like the witches’ kettle in Shakespeare’s Macbeth. The South China Sea matters not only because it is contested territory, but because it’s hugely important to the smooth operation of the global economy. More than $5 trillion of the world’s annual trade passes through the South China Sea, all under the watchful eyes of the (oddly named) People’s Liberation Army Navy.

China’s aggressive behavior in building these artificial islands tracks with its disregard of other norms of international law. Some of these provocations include lack of clarity on the claim itself — a claim that international lawyerswidely regard as preposterous; an air-defense identification zone over the East China Sea directed at the United States, Japan, and South Korea; the placement of a mobile oil platform in Vietnam’s coastal waters; and thewidely reported (and massive) cyberthefts of U.S. intellectual property, industrial secrets, and personal data.

The specifics on the construction of these artificial islands are staggering. Thus far — and construction continues — China has created nearly 3,000 acres of land out of the ocean. Just consider that the highly touted and massive U.S. aircraft carriers (from which can launch a wing of more than 70 jets and helicopters) are only about 5 acres of flattop. Are these artificial islands similar to hundreds of unsinkable aircraft carriers in the South China Sea? Think that shifts the balance between the two competing militaries? You bet it does.

Besides the obvious geopolitical and military issues, significant ecological damage is also underway, according to many scientists. One expert from the University of Miami, John McManus, called China’s building of man-made islands “the most rapid rate of permanent loss of coral reef area in human history.”

Add to this the internal tension under which President Xi Jinping’s regime is operating: falling real estate prices, an aging population, misbalance of men (too many) and women (too few), terrible ecological damage requiring significant mitigation, and, above all, a sputtering economy that is stunting growth. When authoritarian regimes come under pressure, they tend to look outward to find ways to distract the population. Nationalism emerges. Such is the case in China today.

recent speech at the United Nations — full of barely concealed vitriol directed at the government of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe." style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Witness Xi’s recent speech at the United Nations — full of barely concealed vitriol directed at the government of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The tension between Japan and China has been waxing and waningover the past several years. Now, it’s increasing again.

What is the best approach for the United States? This tense situation is out in the open, and Xi’s late September visit to Washington did not fundamentally change anything.

First, despite provocations, the United States must maintain open communications with China and seek ways to reduce the chances of an inadvertent collision either between the United States and China (unlikely) or between China and one of its immediate neighbors (far more likely). The U.S. relationship with China encompasses economic issues, geopolitical cooperation from Afghanistan to Iran, and global environmental issues — the South China Sea dispute is only one element. Dialogue is crucial. And the agreements on military-to-military contact and cybersecurity that the two presidents discussed during Xi’s visit are better than nothing.

Second, the United States needs to strengthen its relationship with existing allies and partners in the region and encourage them to work together better. This applies especially to Japan and South Korea, which, for a host of historical reasons, have long had an uncomfortable relationship. The United States can help build better ties between the two neighbors by promoting military exchanges and exercises, enabling conversations at important events like the Shangri-La Dialogue, and encouraging Track II engagement through academic and research institutions. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a massive multilateral trade agreement, is a big element: Building a network of even stronger trading ties can ensure that America’s friends and allies cooperate with each other. And in particular, working closer with Vietnam makes good sense — and this should include lifting bans on weapons sales.

Third, the fundamental tenets of international law are against China’s approach in the South China Sea. The United States should sternly emphasize this in international forums like the United Nations, the G-7, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The intellectual underpinnings of international legal judgments on the South China Sea are very clear: Nations cannot simply declare a “historical claim” and take over what other nations regard as international waters. The United States, as a global maritime power, should not miss any opportunity to object. And frankly, the United States should finally sign the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, the treaty that governs the world’s oceans, to maintain the high ground in these conversations.

Fourth, and finally, the United States should exercise its traditional rights of transit under international legal norms: its “freedom of navigation” operations. That means overflying Chinese territorial claims and sailing U.S. ships through China’s claimed water space — the waters within 12 miles of these islands. The United States has a long tradition of countering unjustified historical claims by sailing and flying through international waters and airspace. Now is the time to exercise it in the South China Sea.

None of these strategic prescriptions by themselves will resolve the challenges of the South China Sea. Nor will simply moving U.S. military aircraft and vessels through claimed Chinese air and sea space suffice. Pushing back on Chinese claims in the South China Sea requires a broader strategy that treats this violation of international law in the larger context of both Chinese behavior and Sino-U.S. relations. Above all, it will require U.S. leadership alongside America’s many partners and friends throughout East Asia. China’s Great Wall was at least partially successful in keeping foreigners out. Its Great Wall of Sand will not be.

STR/AFP/Getty Images

Rumblings of Discontent in Saudi Arabia

by THOMAS MOUNTAIN-SEPTEMBER 30, 2015

Discontent is brewing in Saudi Arabia, that bastion of reaction on the Arabian Peninsula, with the Saudi Royal Family seeing some of its worst internal dissent in decades.

The new King has endowed his favorite son with command of the Saudi military, amongst other major responsibilities, and now the Saudi people find themselves in a Vietnam style quagmire in Yemen, something new to the Saudi people, that has seen Saudi blood being spilled, with another general, almost certainly from the royal family, killed whilst waging war.

Coupled with the drastic fall in oil revenue, which has seen the Kingdom forced  to make a cash withdrawal from its foreign accounts of up to $100 Billion in recent weeks, money needed to cover the governments deficit, and it seems the strain is beginning to take its toll.

How long the Saudi Kingdom can survive $40 (or maybe lower) a barrell oil is the question, for the Family Saud may have spent above its means and not put enough into the rainy day fund.

The big picture for Saudi Arabia has had storm clouds hanging over its head since the Arab Spring started almost 5 years ago. The Shi’ite minority, whose homeland in the east includes most of the major oil fields, have been suppressed, and it seemed the storm clouds had passed.

Then the aged monarch finally passed away and a new King was coronated, an act complete absent from the Holy Koran. The King anointed his favorite son to be his right hand and the disaster in Yemen was launched. Saudi, and Emirate, troops have finally set foot on Yemeni soil and the battle for the capital Sana’a seems to have begun.

Already a well aimed rebel launched north korean scud missile hit an ammunitions dump in Aden and dozens of sons of Wahabi were killed, and now the Saudi news grows  hesitant to tell the full story of the mounting casualties.

And then the construction crane crashes in the heart of Islam crushing over a hundred, and now the thousand or more trampled to death in the latest stampede and wiser heads in the Saudi Royal family have begun to speak out against the incompetence of their blood relations.

With the Iranian victory in the nuclear agreement with the USA, and Putin forcing the USA into a very begrudging alliance over Syria, the Saudi Royal family has good reason to be nervous, for the Iranian “snakes” are riding high all the while the Wahabists find themselves hemorrhaging cash and Saudi blood.

With the mass starvation beginning to rage in Yemen, international opinion, until now ignorant of this fact due to a news white out by the western media, will inevitably turn against the Saudi invasion and Obama and the next in line to the Pax Americana throne will be stuck in a very tricky spot.

Its bad enough trying to defend, and justify, a regime that has beheaded more people then ISIS this year, let alone the damaging images of starving Yemeni children on television screens around the world, starvation entirely due to the Saudi aid blockade, and the US Empire will find its own people pressuring it to end its indispensable role in the War on the Yemeni People.

The house of Saud has been a conservative one and avoided disastrous foreign interventions until now. The War in Yemen will only sour Saudi public opinion of the regime and has the potential, if gone bad enough, to spark a coup d’etat by the non royal military leadership, something the Family Saud has long feared the most.

It seems the crashing price of oil could do the most damage to the regime, especially if they don’t have enough liquidity to meet the Kingdom’s  massive budget deficit, something only expected to worsen. If the regime has to make significant domestic cuts, which have to be inevitable, grumbling will increase and the bought and paid for obedience of the Saudi people may no longer be taken for granted. Again, the major threat to the regime is a military mutiny, something the incompetence of the Kings Defense Minister/son could eventually trigger.

Lets face it, the Houthi’s are not about to lay down their arms and accept Saudi conquest, and being a battle hardened lot going back a decade or more, the fight for the Yemeni capital Sana’a is going to be brutal. And even when Sana’a falls, the Houthi’s will retreat back into their tribal lands, some of the ruggedist terrain in the world, and wage a very debilitating guerilla war against the occupying Wahabi army. They call it a quagmire for good reason, for as the Egyptian Army learned so painfully back over 50 years ago, getting in the middle of Yemen’s tribes will only bring disaster.

Whether a palace coup is being organized in Saudi Arabia is still only conjecture, but the rumblings of discontent are being heard, rumblings which could turn into serious problems for one of Pax Americana’s most important vassals in one of the most critical regions on the planet.

Thomas C. Mountain attended Punahou School for six years some half a dozen years before “Barry O’Bombers” time there. He has been living and writing from Eritrea since 2006. He can be reached at thomascmountain at g_ mail_ dot _com

More articles by:THOMAS MOUNTAIN

Some refugees in Germany get Zumba classes, but others sleep on the streets

What life looks like for refugees in Germany

To pass the time, migrants from Syria and Iraq listen to music, chat, play soccer and try to stay safe.

By Anthony Faiola, Souad Mekhennet and Stephanie Kirchner September 29

BERLIN — Bracing for at least 800,000 asylum seekers this year — more than any other nation in Europe — Germany is rolling out one of the region’s largest emergency responses since World War II. Yet as it scrambles to shelter the refugees in tent cities, at sports centers and even on the grounds of a former Nazi labor camp, a nation known for its efficiency is struggling to absorb them.

A look at the numbers behind the stream of refugees flowing into Europe as political leaders struggle to ease the burden. (Jason Aldag/The Washington Post)

Some Refugees in Germany Get Zumba Classes, But Others Sleep on the Streets by Thavam Ratna

Interview - India warns global charities not to work against government

Junior Home Minister Kiren Rijiju pauses during an interview with Reuters inside his office in New Delhi, September 29, 2015.

BY RUPAM JAIN NAIR AND FRANK JACK DANIEL-Thu Oct 1, 2015

An Indian minister monitoring $1.8 billion of foreign aid has accused Greenpeace of inciting protests against industrial projects and warned global activists and aid organisations not to work against the government.

The warning from junior home minister Kiren Rijiju follows a crackdown by Prime Minister Narendra Modi's administration on foreign-funded non-governmental organisations (NGOs), including Greenpeace and the Ford Foundation.

The crackdown has been criticised by the United States and Indian civil society groups.

Greenpeace activists were "unnecessarily inciting innocent people against crucial projects without any valid reason", Rijiju said in an interview with Reuters this week.

The ministry's foreigners division, which is under Rijiju and oversaw some $1.8 billion of incoming aid in 2014, suspended Greenpeace's licence to get foreign funds this year, citing financial irregularities. It has frozen some Greenpeace bank accounts.

The actions came after Greenpeace supported protests against a planned $3.2 billion coal mine in the Mahan forests in central India, which resulted in a court withdrawing permits for the Indian companies Essar and Hindalco (HALC.NS) to develop the project.

An Indian activist leading the campaign was barred from flying to London to address parliamentarians about the project. The foreigners division this year prevented one foreign Greenpeace official from entering the country.

Rijiju said Greenpeace had diverted foreign contributions from their stated purpose. Greenpeace has taken legal action against the government's measures.

"Punitive steps have been taken because rules were totally violated," Rijiju said.

"Some of the NGOs, if they are designed to work against a particular party or government, or they misuse the contributions, then they will attract provisions," he said, adding it was "evident" Greenpeace was hostile to the government.

Greenpeace, which is fighting the government measures in court, denies its activities are hurting development in the world's largest democracy.

"The government's sole aim is to crush each and every voice of dissent. How can campaigns for clean air, programmes for renewable energy be anti-government?" asked Vinuta Gopal, acting head of Greenpeace India.

More than 50,000 Indian charities depend on foreign aid for projects. Under Rijiju, the department has cancelled the licenses of about 13,000 NGOs.

Rijiju said he aimed to stop the misuse of foreign funds. He said he was working to make it simpler for aid groups and charities to comply with regulations.

Critics say the crackdown is to muzzle dissent and Rijiju's actions could lead to less foreign aid for projects that fight child marriage, provide clean water in slums and feed pregnant women.

(Additional reporting by Paritosh Bansal; Editing by Robert Birsel)

Horror attack highlights dire need for mental health care reform in Thailand

Apasa Seewua is taken away by police after murdering 5 children in Chiang Mai, Thailand earlier this week. Image via Ruamkatanyu News on Facebook.

Image via Suan Prung Psychiatric Hospital’s website

The brutal murder of five children in Chiang Mai should be a major concern for a Thai government promoting ‘happiness', writes James Austin Farrell

By Saksith Saiyasombut & Siam Voices Oct 01, 2015

Five children were killed this week when a 24-year-old man, Apasa Seewua, said to have recently been released from Suan Prung Psychiatric Hospital in Chiang Mai, entered a house and attacked them with a 19-inch meat cleaver. One of the victims was an eight month old baby. The others were all aged less than eight years old. One other child, as well as a pregnant mother, survived the attack and both are reported to be traumatized but recovering in hospital. Two boys and one girl were the injured mother's children, while the other two victims were the woman's nephew and the son of a neighbour.
Horror Attack Highlights Dire Need for Mental Health Care Reform in Thailand by Thavam Ratna

Reason Number 1 For The Appearance of Breast Cancer: You Drink it Every Day But You Are not Aware of This Fact

September 27, 2015

Japanese women are the ones who are least susceptible to breast cancer.  Allegedly, their slim line is the main reason behind this.

According to the findings of a Norwegian study, individuals who consume three glass of milk daily, have a two times increased risk of breast cancer in comparison to the ones who consume half a cup, or less.

Unfortunately, the breast cancer is in expansion and we are all aware of it. If we take into consideration a whole range of factors, it turns out that milk could be responsible for the increased risk of this disease. Initially, it was thought that milk only accelerates the development of an already existent cancer, but the Norwegian scientists claim that apart from that, it is the main culprit for its occurrence in the first place.

United States, Sweden, Finland, Canada, and Britain are the countries in which most cases of breast cancer are identified. Interestingly, the consumption of milk takes top position particularly in these countries. On the other hand, breast cancer is an extremely rare occurrence or it doesn’t exist at all in countries where milk of animal origin is used. As mentioned in the very beginning, women who tend to drink three glasses of milk a day are more likely to develop a breast cancer in comparison to the ones drinking only half a cup.

Hormones and growth factors in milk are known to have carcinogenic content, and the same was proved for synthetic supplements of vitamin D, which milk is often enriched with. In general, patients consume two times more synthetic vitamin D than others.

However, these causes for the development of breast cancer are not the only ones. It was noted that the number of cases is growing with the increase of sugar, pastries, and some types of meat, such as pork. On the other hand, the consumption of fish and raw vegetables leads to significant decline.

Finally, there are the bras, especially the tight ones, which increase the risk as well. Women, who wear a bra at least 12 hours daily, increase the risk by more than 20% in comparison to the ones who use them moderately, rarely, or never. This especially refers to bras which contain plastic elements or metal.

EU calls for ‘immediate adoption of essential confidence building measures’ for victims in Sri Lanka

 30 September 2015
The European Union called on the Sri Lankan government to implement the “immediate adoption of essential confidence building measures” for the victims of Sri Lanka’s armed conflict.

In a statement delivered to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the EU said it expresses its “deepest solidarity with the victims and their relatives” and had “sincere admiration for the manner in which victims have contributed to the work of the OISL and have placed their confidence in the Human Rights Council”.

Stating the tabled resolution on Sri Lanka “marks a crucial step towards a credible transitional justice process... with the active support and participation of the international community”, the EU said:

“The full implementation of these commitments is now needed, starting with prompt action on a fully participatory national consultation, especially with the victims, for the design of a comprehensive justice process and the immediate adoption of essential confidence building measures”.

See the full text of the statement here. 

The Sri Lankan Prime Minister began consultations of the UN resolution and planned justice mechanism, by holding discussions with members of the Buddhist clergy and Sri Lankan security forces.

See our earlier post:  Ranil consults with military and monks over UN resolution (29 Sep 2015)

European Union GD Srilanka by Thavam Ratna

The long road from Geneva

Thursday, 1 October 2015

For two weeks, Sri Lanka has been a hot topic at the 30th session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, after a report by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Investigation (OHCHR) found evidence of probable war crimes committed in the island during the last years of the conflict. The report implicates both the LTTE and Government troops in what investigators called “systematic” killings, extra-judicial executions, the recruitment of children as soldiers and enforced disappearances.
The report contained few surprises, after Britain’s Channel 4 television systematically released evidence of alleged war crimes committed during the last phase of the war in Sri Lanka in films released over the past three years. With the exception of evidence gathered about a few more ‘emblematic’ cases that point to atrocities committed during the conflict and extensive information about LTTE crimes of war, the report’s findings differ little from the UN Panel of Experts (PoE) report commissioned by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon in 2010. But the OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL) report has more significance for several reasons. 

The Long Road From Geneva by Thavam Ratna

Wigneswaran expresses concerns over UN resolution

October 1, 2015

Chief Minister of the Northern Province, C.V. Wigneswaran, on Wednesday expressed concerns over “some of the serious weaknesses” in a draft resolution on Sri Lanka, which is likely to be adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council on Thursday.

In a statement, Mr. Wigneswaran, a former judge of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka, said any attempt to entrust the responsibility of prosecution with any local prosecutor “can never bring justice to victims”.

In this context, he referred to reservations of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights about a domestic judicial mechanism going into allegations of human rights violations. The draft resolution’s “failure” to propose a mechanism that could gain the support and confidence of the victims “is a matter of grave concern”.

However, he called the resolution an “important step forward.” The document has set a number of markers and “key recommendations.”

He called for “the most rigorous monitoring [of implementation of the resolution] and proactive involvement of international community” to ensure “the kind of progress which all the communities of Sri Lanka deserve”.

Meanwhile, an appeal by a host of civil society organisations based in Northern and Eastern Provinces and four political parties said they were receptive to the idea of a credible hybrid mechanism if it’s being led by its international component under the aegis of the UN.

Sri Lanka’s Credibility Questioned by the U.N. Rights Boss

Statement by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein via videolink to the Human Rights Council

The Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints regarding Missing Persons that was appointed by the previous Government has continued its work, despite widespread concerns raised about its credibility and effectiveness. We believe this Commission should be disbanded and its pending cases transferred to a credible and independent institution established in consultation with families of the disappeared.

---

( September 30, 2015, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) I am pleased to present the report of OHCHR on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka, including the findings of the comprehensive investigation mandated by Human Rights Council resolution 25/1. As you know, following signals of engagement by the newly elected Government of Sri Lanka in January 2015, the Human Rights Council decided to defer consideration of the report until this thirtieth session.

Sri Lanka’s Credibility Questioned by the U.N. Rights Boss by Thavam Ratna

Sri Lanka war crimes resolution softened before U.N. debate

 BY SHIHAR ANEEZ-Tue Sep 29, 2015

A U.S.-backed resolution at the United Nations that seeks justice for victims of Sri Lanka's 26-year civil war has been softened to keep its government on board and allay the concerns of powerful neighbor India, sources say.

The latest draft, expected to be adopted in Geneva on Thursday, fails to specify the powers and role of foreign prosecutors and judges in trying war crimes suspects – a major shortcoming, in the eyes of human rights groups.

They and some diplomats say that reflects the balancing act needed to keep Sri Lanka's new reformist leadership on board while making a credible attempt to end a culture of impunity over what the U.N. calls the mass killings of tens of thousands of people by both sides in the final stages of the conflict.

"Everything now depends on implementation - the text was worded in a very ambiguous way," said Alan Keenan, Sri Lanka analyst at the International Crisis Group.

A judicial process with teeth would hold out a realistic prospect of punishment for senior figures in ex-president Mahinda Rajapaksa's government and military, as well as Tamil Tiger rebels, who waged a bitter final battle in 2009.

The U.N. has estimated that 40,000 people died, many of them civilians, as government forces tightened the noose around a patch of land on the Jaffna Peninsula where Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) rebels were penned in.

But the U.S.-led draft agreed with the Sri Lankan government falls short of explicitly meeting a call by the U.N.'s human rights chief for a special court staffed with international judges, prosecutors, lawyers and investigators.

Such "hybrid" courts have emerged in recent years as a way to deliver justice in places such as East Timor, Kosovo and Sierra Leone against powerful individuals capable of threatening judges or witnesses.

The text instead vaguely affirms the importance of participation in a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism of "Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defense lawyers, and authorized prosecutors and investigators".

John Fisher, Geneva director at Human Rights Watch, said the Sri Lankan government had resisted appointing an independent international prosecutor and a majority of foreign judges.

"Meaningful foreign participation and international monitoring will be needed to prevent local pressure and intimidation from interfering with a fair judicial process," he said.

"SUBSTANCE STILL THERE"

Sri Lanka argues that President Maithripala Sirisena's constructive engagement with the U.N. marks a break with the recalcitrance of Rajapaksa, whom he defeated in a presidential election in January.

Sirisena won backing on Monday from U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who endorsed a "credible domestic process" with international support when the two met on the fringes of the U.N. General Assembly in New York.

How this would work in practice still needs to be hammered out. "In order to ensure credibility, we of course need some kind of international involvement. But it will be decided after the consultation process," one Sri Lankan official said.

A source familiar with the drafting discussions said the Sri Lankan government wanted to create the impression the resolution had been watered down to placate the majority Sinhala community that formed Rajapaksa's power base.

"The substance is still all there," said the source, who requested anonymity. The U.S. draft is widely expected to be adopted by consensus at the U.N. Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva.

A Western diplomat in Colombo and a source at the Tamil National Alliance, an opposition political party, said India had been at the forefront of efforts to ensure there was no full international war crimes probe in Sri Lanka.

This included lobbying by India to change the description of judges from "international" to "foreign" in the draft resolution, reflecting concerns that India could one day face a similar judicial reckoning in its disputed territory of Kashmir.

Sources familiar with New Delhi's thinking flatly reject those suggestions, saying the resolution was worded to reflect Sri Lanka's concerns about protecting its sovereignty.

(Additional reporting by Ranga Sirilal, Stephanie Nebehay and Douglas Busvine; editing byAndrew Roche)

Estonia and Switzerland invite Sri Lanka to ratify Rome Statute of ICC 30 September 2015 Addressing the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) discussion the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL), Estonia and Switzerland invited Sri Lanka to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a guarantee against non-recurrence. While calling on Sri Lanka to reform its criminal code, Switzerland said "[encouraged] the Government of Sri Lanka to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and to accept the jurisdiction of the Court from 1 July 2002 according to Article 12 paragraph 3 of this instrument." Endorsing the recommendations of the OISL report, Estonia said, "as an additional guarantee against impunity and non-recurrence, Estonia invites the government of Sri Lanka to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court". See full statementhere.

Sri Lanka: President Maithri Addresses the UNGA ( Full Speech)

Address by His Excellency Maithripala Sirisena, President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka ( UN Photo/Cia Pak )

( September 30, 2015, New York City, Sri Lanka Guardian) Watch the speech delivered by the President Maithripala Sirisena at the UN General Assembly short while ago.

In English

Original video

read it here

Download (PDF, Unknown)

A Potential Sri Lankan War Crime Suspect Speaking at UN General Assembly?

 Sep 30, 2015

Tamils For Obama wishes to bring to the attention to the world body about a potential Sri Lankan war crimes suspect, who has publicly admitted to his involvement in mass killings of Tamils, is scheduled to speak at the United National General Assembly on September 30th.

Sri Lankan President Sirisena admitted to the fact that he was the acting defense minister during the final weeks of the war, when large number of Tamils were killed, including those surrendered.

 

It was during his time that Sri Lanka rejected appeals by world leaders, including from President Obama, to stop shelling and bombing an area called "No Fire Zone", which was created by the Sri Lankan Government, where thousands of Tamil civilians assembled for safety.

 

This is what Sri Lankan President Sirisena said in the interview:

 

"I was the Minister in Charge of Defence during the last two weeks of the war in which most of the leaders of the LTTE were killed with General Fonseka at the helm of the Army. Prior to that I have acted as the Minister of Defence five times during the height of the war." Maithripala Sirisena's Interview to Daily Mirror (Published: January 2, 2015). Here is what Economist wrote:

 

"Sirisena is hardly a beacon of hope for the Tamils: he was acting as defence minister in the nightmarish final fortnight of the war"

 

Recently, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report about these killings and recommended a hybrid judicial mechanism for accountability. UN Human Rights Council in Geneva is following up on his report.

 

After the report was published President Sirisena said: "We managed to stop UN publishing names of perpetrators". Here are the basic facts:

 

Around 70,000 Tamils were killed in six months and women were sexually assaulted and raped by Sri Lankan Security Forces in 2009. (UN InternalReview Report).

 

Several were killed due to deliberate and intense shelling and bombing of areas designated by the government as "no-fire zones", where Tamil civilians had assembled for safety.

 

Sri Lankan Government also restricted food and medicine for Tamils, resulting in large numbers dying from starvation and many of the injured bleeding to death.

 

There are 90,000 Tamil war widows. (May 2012 report by British Foreign and Commonwealth Office on Human Rights and Democracy).

 

Due to the ethnic nature of the conflict, no one was held accountable for the repeated mass killings of Tamils since 1958.

 

Members of the Sri Lankan Security forces are almost exclusively from the Sinhalese community and the victims are all from the Tamil community.