Israel imprisons Palestinian tour guide

Daoud al-Ghoul stands outside a Palestinian home taken over by Israeli settlers in the Old City of Jerusalem in October 2013.
Ryan Rodrick BeilerActiveStills

Ryan Rodrick Beiler-25 February 2016

Palestinian tour guide and youth organizer Daoud al-Ghoul was sentenced to 18 months in prison last week. An Israeli court convicted him of membership in a prohibited organization.

Sources close to al-Ghoul told The Electronic Intifada that he was accused of being a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a Marxist political party banned by Israel.

Al-Ghoul had already spent months in jail before last week’s trial and sentencing. In June last year, he was called in for questioning at the Israeli interrogation center in Jerusalem known as the Russian Compound andsubsequently arrested. That came after a months-long order banning him from Jerusalem, the city of his birth and lifelong residence.

In December 2014, al-Ghoul and four other Jerusalem activists were expelled from Jerusalem for four months. Israel declared that the men were a danger to public security, based on secret evidence which they were prohibited from seeing or disputing.

Israel twice renewed the ban on al-Ghoul’s ability to visit Jerusalem or the West Bank, lengthening the ban to six months.

Secret file

Al-Ghoul likened the orders to administrative detention, Israel’s practice of indefinitely imprisoning Palestinians without charge or trial.

“We don’t have any information,” al-Ghoul told Middle East Eye at the time of his expulsion. “The Israeli police are saying it was a secret file. And in the Israeli file they tell me they are saying that I am a danger to the Israeli state.”

Al-Ghoul also received orders banning him from the rest of the occupied West Bank and prohibiting him from traveling abroad, so he temporarily relocated to Haifa, a city in present-day Israel.

“We are not afraid,” al-Ghoul told The Electronic Intifada soon after receiving the expulsion orders. “We are fighting for our future and we have nothing to lose. We refuse this decision. It is our homeland. It is our basic right to live in our houses in Jerusalem.”

Read More

UAE beat foreign prisoners and gave them electric shocks, evidence shows

Evidence shows authorities used brutal techniques on Americans, Canadian and two Libyans, following previous claims of torture by family members

 Salim Alaradi, a Canadian-Libyan citizen, with one of his sons. In a report obtained through Canada’s access of information act, consular officials documented visible injuries during his detention. Photograph: Marwa Alaradi

Photograph: The Libyan Association for Victims of Torture and Enforced Disappearance

Alan Yuhas-Friday 26 February 2016

Authorities in the United Arab Emirates have subjected foreign nationals in secret detention to electric shocks, beatings and other abuses, according to evidence shared with the Guardian by multiple sources within the country.

The evidence depicts a variety of brutal techniques employed by UAE interrogators on several foreign nationals, including two Americans, a Canadian and two Libyans, detained since August 2014, most of the time without charge. According to sources in the UAE, each of the prisoners suffered severe beatings, sometimes with rods, sometimes in what was called a “boxing ring”, and sometimes while suspended from a chain.

Other techniques described include electric shocks, prying off fingernails, pouring insects on to the inmates, dousing prisoners with cold water in front of a fan, sleep deprivation for up to 20 days, threats of rape and sexual harassment, and, in two cases, sexual abuse.

The evidence from several sources, shared on condition of anonymity, follows previous claims of torture by family members of the prisoners.

In a statement, the UAE’s embassy in Washington DC did not directly respond to the allegations of torture, but asserted: “The individuals in question are entitled to all of the due process guarantees under the constitution and laws of the United Arab Emirates in accordance with international fair trial standards.”

“During the period of detention they were allowed to contact their lawyers, diplomatic representatives and families,” it continued. Embassy personnel declined further comment “since the case is ongoing”.

The latest allegations echo interviews with detainees’ family members, and separately acquired documents.

In a report obtained through Canada’s access of information act, for instance, consular officials documented visible injuries on 46-year-old Salim Alaradi, a Canadian-Libyan citizen, when they visited him. The report, from December 2014, details “visible bruises about two inches in diameter on his left arm and leg”.

Alaradi’s brother, Mohamad, was also detained without charge that year but eventually released. Last year he told the Guardian that authorities used “an electric chair”, a “machine” tied to his nails, sleep deprivation and beatings during interrogations.

Read More

Income distribution continuing to be major issue in Africa

February 24, 2016, 7:55 pm 

A 14-month-old baby undergoes an arm circumference test for severe acute malnutrition in Ogolcho, in Ethiopia's drought affected Oromia region on January 31, 2016 - AFP

Specialized agencies, such as the UNDP, are open enough to admit to the existence of ‘structural factors’ in the world poverty and deprivation situation but there needs to be a more vigorous underscoring of these issues. Clearly, the non-possession of land in substantial amounts by peasants everywhere is a key ‘structural’ constraint to the elimination of poverty and hunger but there needs to be a less timid espousing of land reform by the UN and other organizations that focus on these questions.

‘Africa 2016’, a major investment forum covering the entirety of the African continent has just concluded in Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt, with a call for ‘Mega African projects to attract investments’, among other things. However, the world has also been put on notice by news from the continent that a million children are severely malnourished in eastern and southern Africa.

To be sure, Africa could no longer be considered ‘a sleeping giant’ among the world’s continents but how is one to reconcile news about Africa’s glowing growth prospects with information about continuing near starvation among section of its population?

Breaking the bad news, an AFP report said: ‘Children in the region face food and water shortages, with rising prices worsening the situation as families are forced to skip meals and sell belongings….Lesotho, Zimbabwe, and most of South Africa have declared drought emergencies, while in Ethiopia, the number of people in need of food assistance is expected to increase from 10 million to 18 million this year.’

What the world has come to recognize as the ‘development process’, featuring mainly investment-led growth, needs to be persisted with in Africa but how effective are these strategies in promoting redistributive justice, which is one of the surest guarantees against mass poverty, malnutrition and health problems that end life prematurely? This is the prime issue that is raised by the spectre of starvation and death which is haunting parts of Africa.

If one is to comprehend the principal factors at the heart of Africa’s food scarcity issues, then s/he ought to read Susan George’s best seller of the seventies: ‘How the Other Half Dies’. This seminal work could be considered a no-nonsense approach at disclosing ‘the dynamics’ behind poverty and deprivation in all of the world’s principal continents and not merely in Africa. Among other things, George points to the role played by MNC-led agribusinesses in world food deprivation. This is a point that warrants refocusing on at a time when mega investments seem to be the major draw for the governing elites of particularly the global South. Whether the aim in foreign investment be infrastructure development or otherwise, ‘development drives’ would come to nought if state intervention does not ensure a fair distribution of accruing wealth among a country’s population.

Specialized agencies, such as the UNDP, are open enough to admit to the existence of ‘structural factors’ in the world poverty and deprivation situation but there needs to be a more vigorous underscoring of these issues. Clearly, the non-possession of land in substantial amounts by peasants everywhere is a key ‘structural’ constraint to the elimination of poverty and hunger but there needs to be a less timid espousing of land reform by the UN and other organizations that focus on these questions.

Volatility of markets and food prices are commonly accepted as being among the prime reasons for food deprivation and poverty but there also needs to be a more thorough working out of ways and means of ensuring the poor are less dependent on market uncertainties.

However, as often pointed out in this column, the fickleness and uncertainties of the market economy comprise chief obstacles to ensuring the economic stability of ordinary people. If food prices are prone to fluctuate, there is no way in which the food security of the people could be guaranteed. Accordingly, if the market mechanism is allowed to play a chief role in the resolution of a country's economic issues, there would little point in speaking about the enduring material stability of a country's populace. In a market economy situation, the latter just cannot be promised by states and other decision-making quarters.

Hence, the need to ensure the survival of the main pillars, at least, of the welfare state. In these times of soaring inflation, when the steady growth of national economies cannot be taken for granted, the compulsion ought to be great among governments to inquire into the 'structural roots' of poverty. While climate change issues do impact the economic stability of populations, and this is particularly true of Africa, the steady development and empowerment of a country's human resources and the stable ownership of economically viable plots of land by the poor, could play major roles in the alleviation of poverty. The corollary of this line of thinking is that excessive land ownership by a few ought to be ended by states.

These questions need to be addressed by the entirety of the international community and not merely by African governments. Because, whereas the more resourceful countries of the South and North are today in a position to lay claim to a degree of robust growth, and the BRICS are a case in point, such achievements cannot be considered as enduring or permanent, to even an extent. As could be seen, there is currently a slowdown in global growth and the G20 has been called upon by its leaders to ensure the dynamic revival of their economies to guard against a full return to recession.

Accordingly, there are no simplistic answers to Africa's travails. The continent's countries could consider accelerating their integration into the world economy, through open market policies, but these measures are no guarantee that the poor of the continent would benefit by them, given the fluctuating fortunes of the world economy. Evidently, the Ethiopean famines of the eighties, for example, which generated mass-scale suffering of unheard of proportions, cannot be dismissed as nightmares of the past which would not return.

These harrowing experiences show every sign of reviving, now that hunger and malnutrition are staging a major comeback in parts of Africa. Lack of empowerment of people and communities is the root cause of human deprivation and poverty and it is nothing short of measures that would guarantee a degree of economic and material independence for these sections that would help in defeating the spectre of mass starvation and death.

Charity was tried out in the eighties as a measure of poverty reduction and alleviation in Africa but charity does not constitute a permanent answer to poverty. IT is people's empowerment that would ensure a degree of deliverance from deprivation.

FactCheck Q&A: will Brexit lead to independence for Scotland?

FactCheck Q&A: will Brexit lead to independence for Scotland?

Nicola Sturgeon and Tony Blair, among others, have warned that a vote to leave the EU in June could lead to the end of the United Kingdom

February 26, 2016 

The theory is that Brexit would be so unpopular with Scottish voters that it would trigger a second independence referendum, and angry Scots would do what they failed to do last time.

Is this doom-mongering, or is there a real danger of the UK falling apart?

How do Scots feel about the EU?

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has said a “leave” vote in the EU referendum would create an “overwhelming demand” for another #indyref.

Polling certainly suggests that Scots are much more likely to vote to stay in the EU than the English on 23 June.

As we found in another FactCheck, recent research from NatCen Social Research found that around half of English voters wanted to stay in Europe, compared to around two-thirds of Scots and three-quarters of voters in Northern Ireland.

Some politicians have expressed doubts about the real strength of the pro-EU vote, with former SNP leader Gordon Wilson saying he and other nationalists might vote “strategically” for Brexit in the belief that it will hasten Scotland towards independence.

And ex-deputy leader Jim Sillars said he was “astonished” at the number of party members planning to vote to leave the EU. But all this appears to be purely anecdotal.

As things stand, there is a clear pro-EU bias in polls of Scottish voters, and it goes back at least 15 years, according to NatCen Social Research:

Read More

Exclusive Interview: CIA does more harm than good in global politics

“The overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran in the 1950s is probably the most critical mistake the CIA ever made.”

Talk to Sri Lanka Guardian John Kiriakou

( February 26, 2016, Hong Kong SAR, Sri Lanka Guardian) John Kiriakou, a retired CIA ( the Central Intelligence Agency) agent who has been in prison for nearly two years after blowing the whistle on the George W. Bush administration’s torture program. He sat with Nilantha Ilangamuwa of the Sri Lanka Guardian for an exclusive interview to discuss his life experiences as a former CIA analyst and case officer, yesterday, February 25th, 2016.

Here are some excerpts of the interview:

Nilantha Ilangamuwa ( NI): I assume this is very the first interview that you have decided to give to the Asian press so I’m glad that you have agreed to talk with theSri Lanka Guardian about the situation you have gone through and share your views on certain issues of domestic and foreign policies of the United States of America with us.

Was it a childhood dream to become a spy?

John Kiriakou (JK): Actually, yes. I was fascinated by the Iran hostage crisis of 1979-1981 and I decided that I wanted either to be a spy or to join the State Department’s Foreign Service. I was fascinated by international affairs.

NI: When was first-time you heard about the CIA and what was your first impression?

JK: The first time I had ever heard of the CIA was in 1975. My parents took my brother, sister, and me to visit my grandparents. When we got to the house, my grandfather asked, “Did you see that terrorists killed the top CIA man in Athens?” That was Revolutionary Organization 17 November’s first assassination. It was of CIA station chief Richard Welch, a crime that remained unsolved until 2002 and to which I devoted a good portion of my career.

NI: Reports say that your professor, who was himself a CIA official, motivated you to join the agency. Tell me more about this interesting part of the story?

JK: Yes, my professor was looking for graduate students whom he thought would be a good fit in the CIA. He pulled me aside and asked if I was interested. I said that I was, and he scheduled a long series of tests for me – medical, psychological, political. The background investigation took about nine months, but I made it through the process and started working for the CIA on January 7, 1990.

NI: As a trainee spy were there certain protocols you followed? How did you find the learning process?

JK: I knew a lot about international affairs, of course, but nothing about intelligence. So they start teaching you from the very beginning. You learn the CIA writing style, the briefing style, and internal politics. Then later, when I joined operations, I learned the art of recruiting spies to steal secrets.

NI: As an agent what do you consider to be the most important contributions of the CIA to global politics?

Read More

Nuclear Deal in Place, Iran Is Testing New Missiles and Doubling Down in Syria

Tehran is wagering the Obama administration is so committed to the nuclear pact that it will look the other way.

BY DAN DE LUCE, ELIAS GROLL-FEBRUARY 25, 2016

During festivities this month marking the anniversary of Iran’s 1979 revolution, officials publicly displayed a mock-up of the country’s latest rocket, the Simorgh. Designed to launch a satellite into space, it bears a striking resemblance to the rocket North Korea just used for its own satellite launch, reinforcing concerns that Tehran is working with Pyongyang to develop advanced ballistic missiles capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe.

Iran’s unabashed pursuit of missile technology is the latest example of how the country is asserting itself in the aftermath of the landmark nuclear deal that Tehran signed in July with the United States and five other major powers. While U.S. officials say Iran has so far abided by the nuclear accord, Tehran in recent months has been flouting separate international restrictions on ballistic missiles and arms imports while expanding its support for militants in the region.

Iran has recently conducted two ballistic missile tests despite a U.N. ban and appears poised to launch its new Simorgh rocket. Western intelligence agencies fear Iran is working its way to building an intercontinental ballistic missile, which could eventually be outfitted with an atomic warhead — if Tehran were to opt out of the nuclear agreement.

And across the region, Iran is waging war through proxies and even its own military units to shore up the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad, undermine Israel, and support Shiite Houthis against Saudi-backed forces in Yemen. Working with Russian warplanes, Iran’s special forces — along with fighters from the Lebanese Hezbollah militia — have helped the Assad regime clear out rebels from strategically important territories like the long contested districts around the city of Aleppo.

The moves are raising concerns in Middle Eastern capitals and in the U.S. Congress, including among some of President Barack Obama’s fellow Democrats who backed the nuclear agreement but are worried the administration could cede too much ground to Tehran.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), who voted in favor of the nuclear deal, said he wanted to see the agreement succeed but that it was time to get “tougher” with Iran. “We’re going to have to be clear that we’re not going to tolerate their bad behavior, and we’re willing to punish Iran,” Coons told Foreign Policy.

Coons and some Democratic lawmakers took a significant political risk in endorsing the nuclear accord, which was opposed by every Republican member of Congress as well as by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other Jewish groups. The support from Democrats followed an elaborate lobbying campaign by the White House, with senior officials offering repeated assurances that the administration would adopt a strict line on Iran’s activities that fall outside the accord.

Read More

Saudi Arabia is reeling from falling oil prices. And it could get much worse.

Skyscrapers and residential property sits on the city skyline seen through the window of a skyscraper under construction in Riyadh. Saudi Arabian stocks led Gulf Arab markets lower after oil extended its slump from the lowest close since 2004. (Waseem Obaidi/Bloomberg)

By Hugh Naylor-February 25

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Stung by falling oil prices, Saudi Arabia has cut spending and subsidies as part of harsh austerity measures that threaten the lavish welfare programs underpinning its stability.

The oil-exporting giant’s economy has gone from producing windfalls to deficits, and Saudi rulers increasingly struggle to provide the cushy government jobs, expensive state handouts and tax-free living that have long bought them domestic obedience.

The pivot to austerity — which also has been imposed by neighboring Gulf Arab oil monarchies — risks triggering unrest in a Saudi society that is conservative and particularly resistant to change, analysts and diplomats warn.

The cutbacks are seen as necessary by King Salman’s son, defense minister and head of economic planning, Mohammed bin Salman. The 30-year-old prince has raised eyebrows for overseeing leadership shake-ups at home and two wars abroad. Advisers say he also intends to wean the country off its overwhelming dependence on oil sales and reform a bloated and opaque public sector.

[Concerns in Saudi Arabia over signs of more military involvement in Syria]

“He understands that now is the moment to capitalize on low oil prices by cutting wasteful subsidies and reforming our economy to make us stronger,” said Fahad Bin Jumah, a Saudi economist and member of the country’s Consultative Assembly who has advised Prince Mohammed.

Oil prices have plunged by about 70 percent over the last year and a half, even falling below $30 a barrel this month, battering the world’s second-largest producer and jarring a society that has grown accustomed to easy money and extravagant consumerism. Oil revenue accounts for an estimated 90 percent of the Saudi government’s income, leading to last year’s large budget deficit of $98 billion, or about 15 percent of gross domestic product.

Read More

Zika and Ebola: A taste of things to come?

By Dr Seth Berkley-26 February 2016

Ebola. Zika. Both diseases that were unknown to many until recently. But there have been huge outbreaks of both - and each time scientists and global health experts were caught off guard.

In this week's Scrubbing Up, Dr Seth Berkley, CEO of the Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance suggests Ebola and Zika may be followed by other public health emergencies fuelled by other lesser-known diseases.

First it was Ebola and now Zika; two official World Health Organization (WHO) Public Health Emergencies of International Concern within as many years.

Both diseases have been known about for decades, and yet in both cases no vaccines or drugs were available when we most needed them. So what's going on?

Is this just a terrible coincidence, being caught off-guard like this twice in such quick succession, or is it part of a worrying trend and a taste of things to come?

At first glance it wouldn't appear that the two diseases have much in common. One is difficult to catch but a ferocious killer, while the other spreads with ease but is relatively harmless to the vast majority of people infected.

Yet, in both cases there is something novel, either in the way the virus has spread or in how it affected people which has made the outbreaks more of a threat.

In global health security terms that is a real concern, because such sudden changes of modus operandi can not only make public health threats even more difficult to predict or anticipate than normal, but also make all the difference between a localised outbreak and global pandemic.

Even more worrying is the fact that with changing trends in human and animal migration, increasing urbanisation, the density of mega cities, the rise in antimicrobial resistance and climate change, such threats could become increasingly more common.

In the case of Ebola, what changed was its ability to spread.

Historically Ebola's aggression has been its own worst enemy; the virus often immobilising and killing its hosts before they had the opportunity to infect others, limiting its spread mainly to contact with the deceased.
                                             Read More

Mixed messages: what now for justice in Sri Lanka?

Feb 24, 2016

It has been a confusing couple of weeks for those following Sri Lanka’s delicate progress back towards peace. Sri Lanka’s President gave two perplexing interviews in which he made troubling and factually inaccurate statements about how Sri Lanka is intending to deal with the past. His Prime Minister also made public comments, firstly seeming to contradict him, then seeming to support him. In the midst of all this, a visit from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights came and went with surprising smoothness.

Now that the dust has settled somewhat, we attempt to pick through what was said and make sense of it all. What emerges is very worrying for Sri Lanka’s future, but not yet unsalvageable.

What was said

Many comments were made over the last couple of weeks by different people in different languages. It is important to look in detail at what was said and meant on each of these occasions.

The controversy started on January 22nd with an interview that President Sirisena gave to the BBC in Sinhala. You can read a transcript here and watch President Sirisena’s telling body language here.

The President appeared to be directly contradicted by his Prime Minister a few days later when the latter gave an interview in English to Channel 4 News. You can watch it here.

read more>>>

CPA bid to unseat SF

Dayasri calls Deshapriya political animal ...

By Shamindra Ferdinando-February 24, 2016, 10:04 pm 

Dr Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu, Executive Director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) on Tuesday claimed that his outfit had refrained from seeking the opinion of the Supreme Court in respect of the People’s Alliance (PA) move to accommodate Ratnasiri Wickremanayake and Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe through the National List due to fear of being given an adverse ruling.

The CPA chief was responding to interviewers Faraz Saukatally and Bandula Jayasekera on TV 1 on Tuesday (Feb.23). Attorney-at-law Gomin Dayasri, who was also on the programme, strongly disputed Dr. Saravanamuttu’s assertion.

The then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga accommodated Wickremanayake and Rajapaksa via the National List following the April

2004 parliamentary election.

Dr. Saravanamuttu said that his organisation had moved the Court of Appeal against the National List appointments because they were concerned about the composition of the Supreme Court. Once the Court of Appeal declined to issue a ruling on the basis it didn’t have the jurisdiction on the matter, they had decided against pursuing the matter fearing an unfavourable verdict.

The CPA chief asserted that it was a tactical move.

Stressing that the decision to move Supreme Court against Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka’s appointment as a UNP National List MP not personal, Dr. Saravanamuttu said such a move would deprive voters of their rights.

The CPA, on Feb. 18, filed a fundamental rights application challenging the appointment of the war winning Army Chief to fill the vacancy created by the death of M. K. A. D. S. Gunawardana. The SC was moved in terms of Article 99A of the Constitution.

"The CPA’s position is that in terms of Article 99A of the Constitution, only a person whose name was included in the district nomination papers or the National List, submitted by the relevant political party, is entitled to be nominated to fill such a vacancy," Dr. Saravanamuttu said.

Among the respondents are UNP General Secretary, Kabir Hashim, Speaker Karu Jayasuriya, Secretary General of Parliament Dhammika Dassanayake, Attorney General Jayantha Jayasuriya, and members of the National Election Commission, namely Mahinda Deshapriya, Dr. Nalin Abeysekera and Professor Ratnajeevan Hoole.

The CPA has requested the Supreme Court to prevent Fonseka receiving ministerial portfolio until final determination of the case.

Dr. Saravanamuttu dismissed as baseless the allegation that the CPA had refrained from proceeding with the earlier court action because he was offered an influential post.

Dayasri, however, stressed that the CPA should have moved the Supreme Court even if it feared receiving an unfavourable verdict. The veteran lawyer commended the CPA and its executive director Dr Saravanamuttu for challenging the latest National List appointment which, he said, was contrary to the Constitution as well as the Parliamentary Election Act. "Our law is clear as Fonseka is not a member of the UNP and in the absence of his name in UNP district or National List he cannot be accommodated," Dayasri said.

Dayasri faulted the Court of Appeal for failing to decide on CPA action. Still, the CPA should have taken the next logical step by testing the Supreme Court, Dayasri said.

Stating that Elections Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya hand handled the presidential and parliamentary polls extremely well last year, Dayasri castigated the National Election Commission, particularly its head Mahinda Deshapriya for accepting Democratic Party Leader Fonseka’s appointment in contravention of the law. "I have lost respect for Deshapriya to some degree. He should have pointed out the irregularity."

The attorney-at-law questioned the failure on the part of Deshapriya to secure opinion of the Supreme Court. Dayasri called Deshapriya a political animal.

Underscoring the supremacy of the Constitution, the lawyer said that the Supreme Court was not above the Constitution and, therefore, Supreme Court judges weren’t above the law. The Supreme Court, too, was bound by the Constitution, Dayasri said.

Sri Lanka: FM Samaraweera on Consultations on Reconciliation Mechanisms

( Samaraweera speaking at the Launch of Consultations on Reconciliation Mechanisms in Jaffna)

By Mangala Samaraweera.-25/02/2016

On January 8th President Maithripala Sirisena was elected on mandate for true national unity, reconciliation and accountability. In fact, point 93 of President Sirisena’s 100 day work programme says,

 “Since Sri Lanka is not a signatory to the Rome Statute regarding international jurisdiction with regard to war crimes, ensuring justice with regard to such matters will be the business of national independent judicial mechanisms.” 

Later, after the new Government was elected, on behalf of the new Government, I requested the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to defer the publication of the OISL Report as the government needed to deliberate on and design the framework for truth seeking, accountability, reparations and non-recurrence.

In September, after having formed a government comprising of the two main political parties for the first time in history, I outlined this framework for reconciliation and accountability at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva based on the four pillars of truth seeking, accountability, reparations and non-recurrence. Later Sri Lanka and all the other countries of the world represented on the UN Human Rights Council co-sponsored a resolution based on the contours of that speech.

The Government of Sri Lanka, the President and the Prime Minister have over the last year repeatedly emphasized our commitment to reconciliation and accountability; and our unwavering commitment to the implementation of the Resolution.

On Independence Day last year, President Sirisena, in a dramatic departure from the insensitivity, short-sightedness and orgy of triumphalism in the recent past, said

“The time and peace required for healing and building sustainable peace and security for all, is upon us. It is now for us to seize this opportunity to ensure the fruits of democracy and citizenship can be equitably enjoyed by all.

A few months later on Remeberance Day, the 19th of May, President Sirisena observed that

“With the ending of the war on May 18 and 19 of 2009, we witnessed a period of peace. We have to ask ourselves with intelligence, experience, knowledge and wisdom; whether we have fulfilled the tasks we should have performed during the post-conflict period.

I think we did not fulfil that responsibility. Prominence was given to the development of physical resources, and there was no importance given to the process of reconciliation among communities.”

Now Independence Day this year, he expressed his commitment in greater detail,

Read More

Why Washington is moving close to Colombo

'What we have heard from the Sri Lankans is their desire to have a foreign policy that allows Sri Lanka to best advance its own interests rather than a foreign policy that relied solely on one relationship.'

'We think this is an attitude that makes a lot of sense. India and Sri Lanka have many areas of shared interests, and it's certainly welcomed by us to see that deepening of those ties.'

IMAGE: Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena in Colombo, March, 2015. Photograph: Dinuka Liyanawatte/Reuters

IMAGE: In May 2015, US Secretary of State John Kerry called on Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena. Photograph: Andrew Harnik/Reuters

February 25, 2016

On the eve of the first-ever US-Sri Lanka Strategic Dialogue in Washington, DC, Nisha Desai Biswal, the Obama administration's point person for South Asia, lauds Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for not only immediately visiting the island nation after its January 8, 2015 election, but also pledging a strong commitment to an economic partnership with Sri Lanka.

Biswal, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, acknowledged in an exclusive interview withAziz Haniffa/Rediff.com, that as India was an undisputed power in the region, on issues such as this that was envisaged to assist in the economic development and rehabilitation of Sri Lanka -- wracked by over two-decades of war -- it was only natural that the US would consult with India, as Washington would with Delhi on issues in the Asia-Pacific region and/or the Indian Ocean region.

On the eve of the first-ever US-Sri Lanka Strategic Partnership Dialogue what's the rationale for it?

We are calling this a Partnership Dialogue between the United States and Sri Lanka and we're very excited that later this week, we will be launching our first Partnership Dialogue.

Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera is going to be in town with a delegation and we have Secretary of State John F Kerry and Under Secretary Tom Shannon who is going to actually chair the dialogue, and various other bilateral meetings that are being teed up for this.

What we are particularly pleased is that US-Sri Lanka relations are really focusing on the broad and enormous potential.

We have always thought that Sri Lanka was an important partner for the United States. In the past, we have been somewhat constrained in being able to talk about the broad areas of partnership because there were a number of issues where we felt that the previous government was not being responsive and not making progress.

With the new government under the leadership of President Maitripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, what we have seen is that there is a very strong desire on the part of that government to have positive, productive and elevated relations with the United States and with the broader international community.

And just as importantly, a very strong commitment to address and make progress on areas of longstanding concern about accountability stemming from the terrible conflict that wracked Sri Lanka for so long, and for trying to really, sincerely, and actively promote reconciliation, promote justice for victims of that conflict.

So, we see that we have a partner in the government of Sri Lanka as we've always seen a partnership with the people of Sri Lanka, but also now with the government to try to advance a broad, a comprehensive relationship between our two countries and between the two peoples.

The last few months, in fact I guess with Secretary Kerry getting out there, you all have been very bullish on Sri Lanka. The change of policy has been quite dramatic.

What really prompted that sort of dramatic change, and how sustainable do you believe it is? Are you confident about the reconciliation process?

Read More