SLPP and the Gotabaya Chinthanaya

By Harim Peiris-March 18, 2019, 11:34 pm 

The press in Sri Lanka, especially the Sinhala press has been avidly following the progress of the proposed alliance between the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) quite closely. The center piece of this attraction has been the choice of its presidential candidate, seemingly a choice between incumbent President Sirisena and former Defense Secretary and Rajapaksa sibling, Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Furthermore, the first-place finish of the SLPP in last year’s local government election, does make its candidate a serious contender if not the front runner in such an election. In that context, political insiders state that at a family conclave late last week, the Rajapaksas decided on the presidential candidacy of Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Media reports regarding the same stated that the strategy adopted, given that there is still about seven or eight months more for the constitutionally mandated November or December election, is that Gotabaya will continue to promote his candidacy through his own organization "Eliya" while the SLPP will continue with building its grass roots network through the process of community consultations in the villages. Accordingly, the policies and politics followed by the SLPP and its presumptive presidential candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa, merits serious consideration, given its potential for being national policy under a new Rajapaksa presidency. Albeit, Gotabaya rather than Mahinda.

The Mahinda Chinthanaya

in retrospect

Sri Lankan politics post the war’s end in 2009, is indeed a new era, now entering its second decade in May 2019. Mahinda Rajapaksa understood this very well, when as president addressing parliament after the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009, he stated that there was now, no longer the excuse of a war to blame for a lack of national development. Accordingly, Sri Lanka, her economy and her society must take off on a development drive of peace and prosperity. The people of Sri Lanka accepted him at his word and the following year in 2010 accorded him Sri Lanka’s second highest presidential election mandate at 57.8% of the popular vote, second only to former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s record setting mandate of 62.3% of the popular vote at the presidential election of 1994. It is worth noting that Mahinda at his zenith in 2010, was significantly behind CBK at her own high point in 1994.

The Rajapaksa second term or the implementation of the Chinthanaya’s "idiri dekma" or way forward, resulted in the imprisonment of the war winning army commander who was his presidential election opponent, the impeachment of the Chief Justice, a China centric foreign policy detrimental to Sri Lanka’s regional and wider global interests, high foreign debt driven white elephant projects of little utility value, the reduction of democratic space and personal freedoms, the rise of majoritarian extremist organizations engaged in anti-Muslim violence and the complete absence of any post war reconciliation as per the recommendations of either the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and / or President Rajapaksa’s own All Party Conference (APC) and its executive arm, the All Party Representative Committee (APRC). The Rajapaksa Administration’s second term, engaged in massive political overreach in the democracy truncating 18th amendment to the constitution and mercifully ended one year ahead of its five-year term, by calling and losing an early election in 2015, to seek an unprecedented third term after four years.

Gotabhaya – old wine

in a new bottle

So, what would a third Rajapaksa Administration, but a Gotabaya Chinthanaya look like? The noises emanating from both "Eliya" and the SLPP seem to indicate, that despite the new packaging, the game plan remains the same. Polarize society through a ratcheting up of ethnic Sinhala nationalist rhetoric and also seek to capitalize on dissatisfaction on non-delivery of expectations and promises by the political forces, now in government, which defeated them in 2015.

There is also on display a distressing disregard for democratic, civil, political and human rights, with the general thrust, that what Sri Lanka requires is a strong leadership, which has been weakened as a result of democratic discourse and processes. This argument of course is not new, but several thousand years old, articulated first in the Senate of the old Roman Empire, during its decline. Where the Roman Senate centralized more and more powers in the emperor for the protection of the empire, but to no avail. In fact, the term dictator originates from an appointment during an emergency of a Roman Magistrate by the Roman Senate as "Dictator" whose diktat or decree was absolute and law. Fascist political theory and practice, mostly in Europe in the middle of the last century, came closest to a modern articulation of these theories and practices.

The Rajapaksas have learnt one lesson from their defeat in 2015, which is that governance matters. The Sri Lankan electorate was not short on nationalist rhetoric during that election. We had Rajapaksa propaganda which rivalled that of Kim Jong-un’s North Korea, but ultimately insufficient to win the election. Sri Lankans just did not feel that they were well governed or their interests served by the Rajapaksa Administration. Towards this end, Gotabaya is being packaged by his handlers, as a non-politician, a professional who can get the job done. A technocrat.

It is interesting that Gotabaya and Eliya sat out the local government elections last year, which the SLPP won, with Gotabaya watching from the US and Eliya studiously silent. Currently they articulate a critique of the UNF, but have not clearly articulated their own program. Moreover, had Mahinda’s "October 2018" revolution succeeded it would have put a damper on Gotabaya’s presidential prospects, but that is water under the bridge. However, Rajapaksa policies and politics have lost thrice now, the latest being the failure to obtain a parliamentary majority in October / November last year despite the President’s own estimation of an inducement of several hundred million Rupees per potential cross over MP. The SLPP did secure 40% of the vote in February 2018, well short of the 50% required for a presidential election victory. Whether Eliya can persuade another 10% of the electorate, perhaps those who voted SLFP in 2018, to support Mr. Rajapaksa in a presidential election, we will know by year end. Current previews of what Gotabaya Chinthanaya may look like, most likely resembles, the Mahinda Chinthanaya repackaged with a fresh face. Fine wine does improve with age, if produced, bottled and stored properly. Given the taste of Rajapaksa rule from 2010-2014, many Sri Lankans may think closely about wanting the latest vintage from Madamullane in Belliatte.

Sri Lanka: 4Ds Diplomacy - Deny, Deceive, Delay And Destroy

The Sri Lankan government is trying to employ its time-tested tactics of delay and destroying the process of international justice mechanism as conducted at home for seven decades. 

by Prof. Ramu Manivannan-16 Mar, 2019 

Already four years including a two-year extension granted to the Sri Lankan Government by the Human Rights Council in 2017, there is little progress in addressing the key goals set out in the Human Rights Council adopted resolution on 1st October,2015 (A/HRC/30/1), titled “Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka”. This resolution was co-sponsored by Sri Lanka and legally implied that it accepted and assented to the resolution in full, and thereby commended it to other members of the Human Rights Council.

Several United Nations high officials and observers are on record that none of the measures so far adopted to fulfill Sri Lanka’s transitional justice commitments are adequate to ensure real progress. It is too naive to say that the progress is slow but the entire process seems to have come to a virtual halt. The World Governments are coming to terms with the ground realities in Sri Lanka with little evidence that perpetrators of war crimes committed by members of the Sri Lankan armed forces are being brought to justice.

Any power or the international institution trying to impart a sense of justice to the Sri Lankan government are best advised to learn from the failure of the Indian government in pleading with the successive Sri Lankan governments to implement the provisions of the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord-1987, especially the 13th Amendment to the constitution of Sri Lanka for over three decades.

The refusal of the Sri Lankan government authorities to comply with its own commitment given at the Human Rights Council reveals two distinct but inter-related realities of international politics and the limitations of global institutions. For the Tamils, this trait of Sri Lankan government co-sponsoring the resolution (A/HRC/30/1) is neither unusual nor unprecedented. This is a characteristic instinct of Sinhala survival in the face of overwhelming crises and walking out of this commitment is being executed through bargains of time and diplomatic maneuvers. There are several historical and contemporary instances to this effect. The international governments including the sponsors of the resolution (A/HRC/30/1) are also responsible for allowing the Sri Lankan government to wriggle away from its own commitment as co-sponsor.

The Sri Lankan government is trying to employ its time-tested tactics of delay and destroying the process of international justice mechanism as conducted at home for seven decades. After presenting the prospects of drafting a new constitution to the UNHRC it has successfully diverted the attention of the global community to the deliberations and divisions within the Sinhala polity than the original commitments it had made through the resolution (A/HRC/30/1).

The current Sri Lankan Government is now trying to seek Cabinet approval for a truth and reconciliation mechanism, when its leaders accepted to address justice and accountability in post-war Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has recently called to the masses for a process of truth telling, regret , and forgiveness, similar to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of South Africa, for a true reconciliation without any reference to key promises of justice and accountability.

Former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has recently observed that ‘’I am disappointed to learn that on the eve of the interactive dialogue on the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights’(OHCHR) report on Sri Lanka in the UN Human Rights Council, the Government of Sri Lanka is resorting to yet another delaying tactic to escape......implementation of Resolution 30/1.” (See., Ceylon Today, 24 February,2019, Colombo Edition).

There are three different positions held by the Sinhala ruling elites regarding the UNHRC resolution (A/HRC/30/1) –

First, demolish the UNHRC process by demonstrating Sinhala nationalism with the determination of defending the war crimes and crimes against humanity in the name of national sovereignty as advocated by Mahinda Rajapaksa and increasingly held by the president Maithripala Sirisena.

Secondly, tactical negotiations to buy time with delay and deception mechanism at work inside the UNHRC with the prospect of another two-year extension with Sri Lanka as co-sponsor once again.

Thirdly, keep experimenting with the art of balancing act between the Chinese interests and Western pressures through strategic bargains in Indian Ocean and South Asia region. All three positions converge at a single point of permanently denying justice to the Tamils.

If the Sri Lankan government seeks and UNHRC agrees for another two- year extension the council should not be content by insisting upon clear, stringent, time-bound benchmarks and a monitoring framework. The Action Taken Report (ATR) should be followed up with an assessment and responses to ATR. The Geneva process should be followed and respected along with its logical course of a recommendation by the UNHRC that United Nations General Assembly set up an International Criminal Tribunal as a subsidiary organ under Article 22 of the UN Charter such as the International Criminal Tribunal of Yugoslavia (ICTY) / the International Criminal Tribunal of Rwanda (ICTR) or request that the UN Security Council refer the case to the ICC pursuant to its authority under Article 13 of the Rome Statute.

As a first step in the direction, Human Rights Council should come forward to establish an Independent, Impartial and International Mechanism for Sri Lanka. It is only through such a mechanism that evidence of crimes held by the Government of Sri Lanka, other States, the OHCHR and civil society actors will be preserved / available for use by the ICC and other national courts bringing cases under universal jurisdiction.

The international process cannot be subordinated to the parasitic worldview of “Sinhala Only” which tolerates neither democratic dissent from within nor genuine concerns from outside including the United Nations and the global community of nations. If world governments led by influential powers witnessed light in the regime change in 2015 of the Maithripala Sirisena government in Sri Lanka, then the continuing darkness of injustice in Sri Lanka cannot be eliminated by abandoning the well-meaning international process due to the resistance and defiance of Sri Lankan government and its authorities.

H.E. Ms. Michelle Bachelet Jeria, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in her recent report released on 8th March, 2019 observed “Since 2015, virtually no progress has been made in investigating or prosecuting domestically the large number of allegations of war crimes or crimes against humanity collected by OHCHR in its investigation, and particularly those relating to military operations at the end of the war.” In corroborating with the High Commissioner’s warning that “the gravity of the cases that a specialized accountability mechanism must address cannot be underestimated,” reveals the dire situation of human rights in Sri Lanka that should undoubtedly remain firmly on the agenda of the Human Rights Council.

Transitional Justice in Sri Lanka suffers from a unique condition of Sinhala chauvinism and ethnic discrimination of Tamils. The UNHRC resolutions has not even generated “top-down” approach to justice in Sri Lanka, leave alone the scope for building the “bottom-up” participatory democratic approach to delivering justice at the grassroots, because of the complete denial and discrimination of ethnic Tamils.

Neither “top-down” nor “bottom-up” approaches to justice are considered feasible under extreme conditions of ethno-centric denial and deceit as demonstrated by the Sri Lankan government. We need to build a bridge between the two approaches without exhausting the options from either end. On the other, Sri Lanka’s approach to justice has been steered by the biases and predispositions of “Sinhala Only” politics combined with the bargains between contending powers as part of the geo-strategic competition in the Indian Ocean region. In this sense, transitional justice in Sri Lanka reflects the reality of global power politics as well as the legal, moral and political dilemmas governing in the international human rights and justice movements in the world today.

The Author is a Professor & Head of the Department of Politics & Public Administration, Chairperson of the School of Politics & International Studies, University of Madras, Chennai, India. He has also published a book on “Sri Lanka: Hiding the Elephant - Documenting Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity,” University of Madras, Chennai, 2014.

Richard: Whose Life Guides My Own

Richard de Zoysa

By Roel Raymond –MARCH 17, 2019

Roel Raymond

I never really knew my uncle Richard. I was five when he was murdered on February 18, 1990, and would have just entered kindergarten. The earliest reference of him came through a childhood incident that involved his mother, Manorani Saravanamuttu—‘Babbia Sinnamma’ to me. For a period after his death, Babbia Sinnamma lived in our house, in Colpetty. She had two Ridgebacks, a male and a female. The grumpy male was Porgy, and the sprightlier female, Bess; titular characters of Dorothy and DuBose Heyward’s play Porgy. One day, when I was about 11, and playing in the garden, I tried to feed Porgy a snail, and he bit me in the ear. In the ensuing caterwaul, I demanded my mother exact revenge—I wanted retribution for having my generous offer rejected so cruelly. 

My mother, who, together with Babbia Sinnamma had rushed out the house on hearing my wails of pain, whispered urgently for me to be quiet! I didn’t know why she asked me to be quiet, but I was hushed into silence by her unexpected tone. I could see Babbia Sinnamma’s quietly sympathetic face hovering over my mother’s shoulder. It was only later that my mother—my ordinarily fierce and over-protective mother— told me quietly that Porgy and Bess were “like children” to Babbia Sinnamma “after her son died.” She didn’t tell me how he had died, or why. Simply that he had. It was important to my mother at that moment, not to hurt the feeling of my grand aunt, her aunt, who had been through so much. It was only much later in life that I understood the significance of that incident. 

I remained largely untouched by Richard’s death during my adolescence. Babbia Sinnamma moved out to a place close to our home, and my mother visited her regularly. I heard Porgy and Bess had passed on, and much later, Babbia Sinnamma too, passed away. The murder of my uncle only came back to haunt me in my twenties, in my mother’s disapproval of my career as a journalist. While she has never explicitly said the words, ‘I don’t want you to be a journalist because of what happened to Richard,” she has in every other way, emphatically and repeatedly, voiced her displeasure at my involvement with anything even remotely linked to politics. My airy defence, “I didn’t choose journalism, journalism chose me (#fact),” does little to reduce her disapproval. 

With time, as I made deeper forays into journalism, my understanding of the circumstances surrounding Richard’s death became clearer. What also became manifestly clear to me, first as a cub journalist, and later as a more established one, was that the memory of the life and death of Richard De Zoyza belonged not solely to his family, but also to a larger cause and conversation. His name would come up habitually in the circles I frequented, and the conversations would invariably make me uncomfortable. Here, he was discussed as though he were a cardboard pin-up, a face on a poster, a stranger. And while people were mostly kind in their thoughts towards him, there were times his loyalties were questioned, his sexuality disparaged and the word ‘elitist’ bandied in too malicious a manner. And through it all, I remained quiet, just as my mother had once asked me to.

Dr. Manorani Saravanamuttu

As a journalist in Sri Lanka, I am all too aware of the numbers of that have fallen. Beginning with the assassination of Thevis Guruge in 1989, the attacks against the media have been perpetrated with indemnity and impunity. Richard’s murder, in 1990, was the first by state-sponsored actors—and the incidents of intimidation, assault, murder and disappearances have only continued. There have been no convictions to date, and the absence of accountability is proof that the current respite is only temporary. Had there been any justice in Richard’s case, and the countless others that preceded and followed, my preoccupation with his murder and continued contemplation of the futility of justice may have never occurred. But the lacuna continues to breathe life to Richard’s death.

Read More

Sexual violence in SL’s armed conflict NEED TO TACKLE STIGMA Associated with victim-survivors

• Women and girls had been subject to various forms of sexual harassment during conflict
• The stigma hinders them from  overcoming the trauma they suffered

19 March 2019

2019 marks the first decade after the end of the war. Along the road to peace-building and reconciliation that we have tread since 2009, it is crucial that we recognize and acknowledge issues related to the conflict and address them promptly. A grim reality of Sri Lanka’s armed conflict was that girls and women were subjected to different acts of sexual violence by members of the army, government officials, and relatives and even married partners during and after the conflict. Apart from the trauma and violation of human rights undergone by those who were subjected to sexual violence, the stigma with which they are seen by their families, communities and even by themselves, makes recovery from such situations all the more difficult.  

 According to the Principles of Global Action on Preventing and Addressing Stigma Associated with Sexual Violence in Conflict, stigma is the penalising or blame on individuals, groups and communities for bringing shame or ‘transgressing’ from social standards. In furtherance of these principles, the Centre for Equality and Justice (CEJ) has endeavoured to study stigma associated with victim-survivors of conflict related sexual violence in Sri Lanka, seeking to identify the root-causes of stigma, its negative effects, and most importantly about how to tackle it.  

How the study was conducted 

It was challenging to understand the life experiences and frustration of the victim-survivors

The study has been conducted in a few conflict-affected areas of the country, gathering data from 53 participants including the victim-survivors themselves, their representatives and also service providers. The CEJ has premised the study on a broad definition to CRSV involving different forms of violence against women.   

Kamaleswary Letchumanan - Senior programme officer, speaking of the challenges faced when conducting the study, stated that it was challenging to understand the life experiences and frustration of the victim-survivors, and difficult to understand the concept of stigma itself. The team also had to take measures to ensure that the victim-survivors are not re-traumatized. 

Findings of the Study

Speaking about stigma and advocating against it can lead to victim-survivors being further reproached by their communities

Ms. Shyamala Gomez - Executive Director - CEJ explained that it is very common for those who have been subjected to conflict related sexual violence to also be stigmatized. The study has identified a cycle of violence where victim-survivors are subjected to further violence at the hands of service providers when seeking relief. There have been ample instances where police officers and other members of government and other services have requested for sexual advances in order to render services to them. Those who view themselves as of no consequence any more for having undergone the experiences that they have, because of the stigma attached to the issue, have sometimes undertaken sex work and given up hopes of leading a dignified life.  

As pointed out by Ms. Gomez, the most critical aspect of stigma in relation to sexual violence during conflicts is how it prevents victim-survivors from accessing the criminal justice system and obtaining legal relief. She stated that it is only one person who has gone through the court process and obtained some sort of relief through the legal mechanisms in place. The distrust in public institutions and the fear of being subjected to further violence have held back some from even making a complaint at the police station.   

A statement made by a victim-survivor - “I never looked for a remedy due to fear. There is no possibility of receiving justice for what happened. The army has a lot of power and influence. No one challenges them. Therefore I live in constant fear.”

Similar to the criminal justice system, victim-survivors have also not accessed any counselling or psycho-social services because they don’t want to be accused of having contributed to the experience that they have suffered. Ms. Gomez stated that some have not even thought of accessing such services.   

The study has also identified that those who have suffered from sexual violence during the conflict view themselves as ‘invalid coins’ and doomed to be spending their lives in misery and that they are of no value.   

A statement made by a victim-survivor- “I sometimes wonder whether this is my fate. People are difficult to understand. When someone falls into trouble they trample them down further. Not only will they do not help, they will not even look at my face”

Ms. Gomez further stated that speaking about stigma and advocating against it can lead to victim-survivors being further reproached by their communities   

“We must not only think about advocating against the perpetration of violence itself, but must address the underlying issue of stigma, which will nevertheless remain with the victim-survivors throughout their lives. Stigma runs like a thread in other problems that they face like the loss of family members, missing persons, loss of property.”

Community-based organizations have been extremely supportive in assisting the victim-survivors in the process of recovering from their traumatic experiences, in accessing police stations and healthcare services.   

Speaking of the lasting harmful impacts of stigma associated with CRSV, Ms. Gomez also spoke about how, in addition to the victim-survivors, their family structures breaks down almost completely. Victim-survivor of alleged rape - “I was married. I had two children. They became frustrated after this incident. My husband started insulting and scolding me. As I couldn’t bear that trauma anymore, I separated from him.”

Protecting rights and dignity of victim-survivors 

A well thought-out approach must be adopted in order to tackle stigma related to CRSV

Ms. Maithreyi Rajasingham, Executive Director - Viluthu-Centre for Human Resource Development stated how an extremely cautious and well thought-out approach must be adopted in order to tackle stigma related to CRSV. She stressed the importance of understanding what stigma really is, because our thought process may be already accustomed to think in a certain way, based on the stigma with which CRSV victim-survivors are viewed.   

Ms. Rajasingham underscored the importance of respecting and promoting the rights and dignity of the victim-survivors when taking these measures. She also highlighted on the need to include in all the measures taken, as those who are affected by CRSV is not a homogeneous group.

Role of the Office on Missing Persons

OMP will strive hard to develop policy and mechanisms to deal with the issue of stigma associated with CRSV

Dr. Nimalka Fernando, Commissioner of the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) clarified that role of the OMP as a State-sponsored mechanism, is to address the issue of the disappeared and missing within the larger context of war, including the issue of sexual violence and stigma. She stated that with State institutions like the OMP coming up, those who are affected are assured that the government has more empathy towards them, showing how people need a response from the State despite the work done by non-governmental organizations. Harping on the importance of having discourses on these topics with State institutions like the OMP, Dr. Fernando assured that the OMP will strive hard to develop policy and mechanisms to deal with the issue of stigma associated with CRSV.  

Dr. Fernando insisted that we need to address stigma that is attached to ethnicity, gender and many other aspects of our lives, and the use of such stigma as a political tool. In that sense, she stated that our efforts must be doubled because we need to, as a democratic society, respond to this issue and take responsibility for non-recurrence.   

“Addressing stigma is not going to be easy because it involves addressing practices and values which have religious connotations and patriarchal system itself. But it is important that we keep pressuring State institutions to take up these issues and lobbying for justice and accountability”

Recommendations

In terms of recommendations, Ms. Gomez stated that existing national action plans like the National Action Plan to address Sexual and Gender-Based Violence (SGBV) launched by the Ministry of Women and Child Affairs and spearheaded by the United Nations Development Programme must be used to address the issue of stigma associated with conflict related sexual violence.   

She also pointed out that measures must be taken by the Office of Reparations to approach those who have been affected because it is unlikely that they will approach the office because of fear of being subjected to stigma.   

In addition to these recommendations, the study has also recommended training public officers to deal with victim-survivors of CRSV and the stigma they experience, facilitating professional and empathetic counselling services for victim-survivors, training media to prevent the stigma from being perpetuated due to unethical reporting and memorializing the pain and trauma of the victim-survivors, which is a recommendation that had been put forward by victim-survivors themselves.  

Ms. Rajasingham also spoke about the importance of memorializing the experiences of the victim-survivors of CRSV in order to addressing the issue of stigma associated with it. She suggested arranging public spaces to engage in dialogue to discuss and understand the stigma and the manner in which it is done. She opined that the acknowledgement of the occurrence of sexual violence and the issues revolving it would contribute to tackle stigma  

The importance of engaging religious leaders was also stressed in order to raise awareness about how certain religious practices may promote stigma and how that must be tackled  

Global Agenda to address Stigma 

Consequences for the victims of violence in conflict are even more acute because of the stigma, shame and humiliation experienced by them and their families

The UN, its agencies and the UK have taken the leadership in developing an international framework to address the issue of stigma associated with conflict related sexual violence. British High Commissioner for Sri LankaJames Dauris states that Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict co-chaired by the UK’s Foreign Secretary and Angelina Jolie, Special Envoy for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees took place in 2014. It was the largest gathering ever brought together on the subject, with 1,700 delegates and 123 country delegations. Mr. Dauris assured that there is greater awareness and global action implemented pursuant to the summit, but that globally, survivors of sexual violence still continue to be ostracized.  

Mr. Dauris claimed that the consequences for the victims of violence in conflict are even more acute because of the stigma, shame and humiliation experienced by them and their families. Years later, they continue to face significant barriers to accessing services like health care, psycho-social support and justice mechanisms.   

“Although tackling issues of stigma is difficult, particularly where strong taboos exist about talking about it, that it is not a good reason not to try. It takes committed politicians, government officials, law enforcement officials, and religious and community leaders to overcome these attitudes.”

Global awakening to hazards of madman’s vehicle design

Undoubtedly Nissan Leaf is the most favourite BEV in Sri Lanka. If its availability and its peripherals could be improved, we could sell much more of it in Sri Lanka. But it’s ironic that in this small country of 400km by 250km, we have more Toyota Prados and Land Rovers than Nissan Leafs. We are in the top 20 GHG emitters in the world (when calculated as kg/km2) and our road density – which still keep on increasing – and latitude all contribute to our being the second most vulnerable country in the world 

---

By. K.C. Somaratna- Wednesday, 20 March 2019 

When my eldest son, Arjuna, brought me a copy of Brian Dumain’s ‘Plot to Save the Planet,’ it sparked off a keen interest in me to see what we, in Sri Lanka, could do to support the plot.

His chapter 5 titled ‘The car you are driving was designed by a madman’ intrigued me as to how a large percentage of mankind consisting of best of brains have taken it for granted that they would be happy to move in a vehicle which wastes 80% of energy purchased at gas station.

Imagine it being in a world where Jack Welch would have spoken about Six Sigma implying there will be only 3.4 defects in a million defect opportunities. Imagine it being in a world where investors of calibre of Warren Buffett would ensure that they would get maximum from every dollar spent in stock market. Imagine it being in a world where Toyota preaches ‘Eliminating Waste’ to be at the heart of Toyota production system and rolls out millions of Toyotas designed and manufactured to use less than20% of the scarcest resource in the world and destroy global environment with that other 80% of the energy. Can there be a greater surprise?

But last two months made me see some signs of an awakening to the issue arising from a joint declaration on Electromobility by Richard Harrington, British Minister, and Michal Kurtyka, President of COP24, and in my own excitement about this announcement I sent mails to both of them describing our own initiatives in this respect in January 2010. I, of course do not expect a reply to my notes. And in Sri Lanka, Professor Rohan Samarajiva, Chairman of ICTA, spoke about topics for serious researching in Sri Lanka to a young researcher community at Sabaragamuwa University on 19-12-2018 and this address appeared in Daily FT and here again vehicular transportation with fossil fuel was at the centre of the discussion. So all this implies that there is some awakening to hazards of ICE powered vehicles we are moving around in.

What we want to emphasise in this article is that the madman’s design has been wasting customers’ funds so far and customers had been thinking that value was worth the ride; but environment as noticed by its temporary custodians in Poland had indicated that environmental cost of ride was too much and something needs to be done and a research strategist here has indicated that economic cost is not worth the energy and country can’t bear the cost. So, shouldn’t I be happy that this new year season, I have global as well as local strategists being concerned about the lunacy we have been exhibiting so far to the peril of global environment and local economy.

Carlos Ghosn saved $ 252 m before “robbing” $ 80 m

It is against this background I see how much Carlos Ghosn has done for humanity. He is one of the pioneers – if not the foremost pioneer – who rectified the madman’s vehicle design and actually eliminated waste associated with that design from highways. When people say that he has “robbed” about $ 80 million from whomsoever – from Japanese government, from Nissan shareholders, from Japanese citizenry – my mind automatically goes to compute how much he has saved.

If we take that Ghosn has sold 300,000 Nissan Leafs during last five years and this 300,000 vehicles had been there for 2.5 years and if each of them had done 15,000km/year and if these had not been there and alternative vehicles would have done 10km per litre of gasoline and gasoline had been $ 50 per barrel, 300,000 Leafs would have saved $ 252 million for the Japanese Government or vehicle users or the citizenry.

Furthermore, we live in an age where responsibility towards customers involve educating them on the performance of products they purchase. It is for this reason that (i) food items on sale do have their calorific values and constituents marked on the pack and (ii) packets of cigarettes do have warning advertisements.

It is my strong belief that all these entities like UNFCCC, IPCC, etc. interested in reducing GHGs in the world should demand that all automobile manufacturers specify the Environmental Impacts corresponding to vehicles they promote or advertise in all advertisements they publish. The three key characteristics they should publicise are (a) amount of energy used per 100km, (b) amount of energy that would be wasted per 100km and (c) amount of Greenhouse Gases emitted per 100km under normal travel conditions. This should be made a global requirement. If the global community is truly interested in addressing this issue of greenhouse gas related climate change, is it not the most logical thing to do?

It is when you think along these lines that one would see the tremendous benefit Carlos Ghosn has brought to the global community and specifically to Japan.

Japan can’t afford to ignore this

One may think that Japan can ignore this global upheaval on greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles and keep on promoting their Toyotas, etc. powered by internal combustion engines. But, Japan will be unable to do it due to its vulnerability to climate risk which it has escaped purely due to its geographic location beyond 300N latitude. Our reasoning goes as follows.

1. According to data put out by MunichRe – German Reinsurer who provides data for Climate Risk Index ratings – between 1997 and 2016, Japan with an area of only 316,000km2 has lost an equivalent of $2.5 trillion due to climate related disasters.

2. Japan’s annual GHG emission per unit area at 3717t/km2 is lower than only those of Taiwan at 8166t/km2 (the seventh most vulnerable country in 2018 ratings) and South Korea at 7010t/km2.

3. Both these countries do have lesser road densities than Japan which has the highest amount of highways per unit area – at 316kmper 100km2 – in the world.

In this league of countries with high road densities and high GHG emissions per unit area, apart from USA and China with high GHG emissions and low road densities, Japan, Germany, UK, Italy and France are the major ones. But the key issue is that out of these Japan has the highest road density, highest GHG emission rate and it is the country closest to the equator.

Hence Japan’s vulnerability to GHG driven climate risk incidents is much higher than those of other countries in the same league and it would be good for Japan to double, treble their efforts in reducing GHG emissions from transportation – the sector which makes the predominant contribution to GHG emissions. With an average vulnerability of about $125 billion per annum to climate risk, Japan should make every effort in this direction and it is our opinion that Japan can’t be doing anything which might give the impression that they don’t promote GHG free transportation.

In fact, Japan needs more than one Carlos Ghosn

Japan is the world’s third largest manufacturer of automobiles and Japan’s Toyota apparently occupies the largest automobile manufacturer slot. As such Japan should be really setting the pace in automobile manufacture in the world and so in respect of electrification of vehicles as well. If what we have said earlier is right, Japan with its very high road density, GHG emissions had escaped severe punishment due to its 350N latitude value.

It can’t reduce its road density overnight and as global climate vulnerabilities increase wholesale, Japan would be in the forefront of those countries most vulnerable to disasters. So, with its average loss of $125 billion due to disasters per annum, Japan needs to do whatever it could do to reduce its vulnerability. So, it needs to double, triple, quadruple its efforts at reducing its GHG emissions. So, it can’t afford to downplay the significance of Carlos Ghosn’s contribution to Japan’s long-term survival by putting him in a miniature cell to sleep on a thin mattress reading spiritual literature.

$ 80 million “played out” by Carlos Ghosn is negligible in comparison to this $125 billion a year loss. With three of the ten largest automobile manufacturers in the world, Japan should have at least two more Carlos Ghosns to steer the movement away from GHG emitting automobile manufacture, if and only if they don’t want to be at the top of the countries vulnerable to climate risk.

One may even wonder whether this action against Carlos Ghosn is merely to show the world that Japan can escape climate change risk without the support of people like Carlos Ghosn. In fact, Japan may have been angry that Japan has not been able to put out even one other worthwhile BEV to talk about in the last few years.Toyota Mirai, their Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicle has not made much progress.
Carlos Ghosn’s relevance to Sri Lanka
Undoubtedly Nissan Leaf is the most favourite BEV in Sri Lanka. If its availability and its peripherals could be improved, we could sell much more of it in Sri Lanka. But it’s ironic that in this small country of 400km by 250km, we have more Toyota Prados and Land Rovers than Nissan Leafs. We are in the top 20 GHG emitters in the world (when calculated as kg/km2) and our road density – which still keep on increasing – and latitude all contribute to our being the second most vulnerable country in the world.

Tesla’s Elon Musk, one may consider as a more charismatic promoter of Battery Electric Vehicles and all peripherals associated with same. But having the huge American market demanding powerful engines to cover nine million square kilometer US territory he would not be interested in catering to us in Sri Lanka. That is where Nissan Leaf comes in handy. On the other hand, other Japanese automakers who have had very popular brands in the ICE vehicle sector in Sri Lanka like Toyota, Mitsubishi, Honda have not been able to provide us with a suitable competitive BEV.

Has ‘Toyota Way’ lost its way in the most important endeavour in eliminating the most significant component of waste associated with road transportation? At our current status vis-à-vis climate risk vulnerability, this is the key aspect we need to look at. Even after reading the statements in that PhD Thesis at MIT “On the road in 2035” – published in 2008 – specifically mentioning that Toyota Camry wastes 2.31 MJ for every kilometre, Toyota has not put out any BEVs into the market. Their attempt at putting out a RAV4 version didn’t take the market place too far.

All these strange circumstances create a doubt in the minds of global automobile enthusiasts as to why this non-arrival of more Japanese BEVs in global market place. It is in this vacuum that Carlos Ghosn performed and put out a Japanese BEV for people to talk about. Even in 2018, Nissan Leaf was the front runner in respect of BEV global sales.
Our own issues at home
We were studying global set up to understand our own set up and identify suitable solutions for ourselves. Our own set up has following characteristics.

First the constant features:

1. We are at 70N and 800E

2. We have a very high road density at 168km/100km2.

Secondly on an on-going basis, annually we (i) generate about 13,400 GWhrs of electricity &18,200 GWhrs of waste energy in the process; (ii) use about 8,000 GWhrs of tractive power in vehicles and emit 32,000 GWhrs of waste energy and (iii) emit about 19,000 kt of CO2in these processes

And as a result of these, we are the second most vulnerable country to climate risk in the world. These aspects demonstrate our craving for energy and what we do to environment in satisfying that craving. When it comes to the economy in fulfilling this craving for energy, last year we doled out about $ 2,300 million to buy our oil and signs are that it will only increase in the future.

Overall outcome of all this is that we will be enhancing probability of our annihilation as a result of this craving for energy. This urgent need for changing over from fossil fuel powered transportation to another mode is recognised by personnel at UNFCCC as well as Prof. Samarajiva and both have hinted that electric powering may be the way to go.

Then Prof. Samarajiva raises the issue that even if we convert from oil powered transportation to vehicle electrification, we would still need fossil fuel to generate electricity. There are two aspects to this. One is that while current tractive power for vehicles come mainly from oil, electricity for the grid in Sri Lanka comes from many sources and a significant part comes from renewables like hydro. Even then, one could argue that any additional energy required for transport need to come from fossil fuel and so it would be the same.

But, what one needs to remember is that generally thermal power stations generate electricity at about 37-40% efficiency, while the internal combustion engines of automobiles are only 18-21% efficient and hence there would be a significant drop in oil consumed, GHGs and waste heat generated.

It is in this framework we offer highway solarisation – defined as “a dedicated infrastructure to generate electricity for powering battery electric vehicles or the grid using solar energy collected by PV solar panels installed along and above highways as a solution for climate change” – to be the best solution for providing energy either for battery electric vehicles or national grid. And this would be energy devoid of any greenhouse gases or waste energy.
What it will do to the environment
It would imply supply of energy not at a cost to the environment like energy from fossil fuels; but energy in a fashion beneficial to the environment. In the process, obviously we will be eliminating a significant portion of greenhouse gases being emitted to-day by energy and transport sectors. Unlike energy cost which will be borne by respective consumer to-day and economic cost born by the citizenry in near future, environmental cost of energy will have to be borne by all living beings on earth for many, many more years in to the future. So that is why mankind need to be concerned about the environmental cost than about other costs.

Vehicle electrification cannot be reversed as could be seen from the number of players already in the field. Almost all automobile manufacturers are investing significant resources on electric vehicle development and any new comers – some of them from entirely different fields of businesses – are also entering the fray.

The irony is that the leading automobile manufacturers today, excepting Nissan and Renault, have not been able to enter the top ten, although once in a way they publicise some exemplary features their own BEVs do possess and it is yet to be seen whether they would be still enjoying the glory they possess today in about another 15 years or so.

So, there is only one solution which could fulfil the expectations of British Minister Richard Harrington, Michal Kurtyaka from Poland and UNFCCC COP 24 and our own Prof. Rohan Samarajiva and that solution encompasses vehicle electrification and highway solarisation.

This integrated solution will eliminate greenhouse gases from vehicles and electricity generation to feed BEVs and additionally prevent solar radiation impacting the highways by intercepting the radiation with a photovoltaic solar panel which will convert 17% of solar radiation (it might become 20% very soon and even above 30% subsequently) and reflect about 10% – the same percentage as the bare road.

The immediacy of the need for action could be further gauged by American Environmentalist – Politician Alexandria Ocasio Cortez submitting a new resolution called the Green New Deal to address climate change on a priority basis. USA was the 10th most vulnerable country in the 2018 Climate Risk Index listing, but escaped from been in the 2019 list, while we were fourth most vulnerable country in the 2018 list, becoming the second most vulnerable country in 2019 list.

The USA has more than nine million square kilometres to play about with, in case of an unwelcome event even with their 330 million people while we have only 65,000 square km for our21 million people. Shouldn’t we start working on our own Green New Deal soon and move away from the top of the climate risk index rating lists.
Conclusion
This is the challenge facing us today; and to our knowledge the only solution is vehicle electrification supported by highway solarisation. As Prof. Samarajiva has quite rightly and emphatically mentioned we cannot afford to be burning so much imported oil for transportation within the framework of a fragile economy.

If USA with so much of area and been beyond 230N with their own oil need to do it fast, we in this small island at 70N need to bring about this conversion much, much faster. I wish we have an Ocasia Cortez in our own political establishment at least to understand the issue and propose a way forward rather than to be chanting sustainable development from every rooftop.

(The writer is Managing Director of Somaratna Consultants Ltd.)

Israel pounds Gaza after “mistaken” missile launch

A Gaza City site struck by Israel the previous night, 15 March.

 Ashraf AmraAPA images

Maureen Clare Murphy- 15 March 2019

The occupied Gaza Strip was subjected to some 100 Israeli strikes overnight Friday after two rockets were fired from Gaza toward central Israel, sounding off sirens in Tel Aviv.

One of the rockets fired from Gaza landed in the Tel Aviv suburb of Holon. No injuries were reported as a result of the two rockets.

Gaza’s health ministry reported four injuries due to the “Israeli escalation,” after which four rockets were fired from Gaza toward southern Israel, according to Israeli media.

J. Shawa جاسم الشوا@shawajason

The bombing frequency is much higher than usual. We have had at least five or six blasts just in our area. Huge orange flashes can be seen from the window. #Gaza #Palestine

218

7:52 PM - Mar 14, 2019

srael Defense Forces

✔@IDF

We hit 100 Hamas military targets in Gaza in response to the rockets they fired at Israeli civilians. Among them:
• Underground rocket manufacturing site
• HQ responsible for orchestrating Hamas terrorism in Judea & Samaria
• Hamas center of unmanned aerial aircraft#StopHamas

8

12:01 PM - Mar 15, 2019

Egyptian mediators stated that a ceasefire was declared at 8am Friday morning, and both the Hamas leadership in Gaza and the Israeli military appeared keen to avoid a prolonged escalation.

Both the Hamas and Islamic Jihad factions in Gaza, the organizations most likely to possess mid-range rockets that could reach Tel Aviv, quickly denied responsibility, with Hamas saying that it would discipline those responsible for acting outside the national consensus.

Israel: rockets launched by mistake

Hamas officials were meeting with Egyptian mediators at the time the two rockets were launched. The Egyptian delegation, which has been conducting indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel for several months, was told to leave by Israel later that night before the bombardment of the Strip.

On Friday, the Israeli military told media that the rockets were likely launched by mistake during maintenance work.

Meanwhile the Great March of Return organizing committee announced that it would postpone demonstrations along Gaza’s eastern boundaries that day, the first cancelation of the weekly protests since their launch on 30 March last year.

The committee obliquely referenced the overnight escalation and called on Palestinians to prepare for a massive mobilization on the one-year anniversary of the protests.

Nearly 200 Palestinians, including 40 children, have been killed during the Great March of Return protestsand more than 7,800 injured by live fire.

A United Nations independent commission of inquiry recently published its preliminary report stating that it had collected evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity by Israel, which has used lethal military force against unarmed protesters in Gaza.

The commission called on Israel to immediately lift its blockade on Gaza – one of the key demands of the Great March of Return – and to investigate “every protest-related killing and injury, promptly, impartially and independently.”

Israeli media reported this week that military police have been instructed to investigate eight additional protest deaths, bringing to 11 the number of fatalities purportedly under review.

B’Tselem, a leading human rights group in Israel, has previously described the Israeli military’s internal probes as a whitewashing mechanism that “serves as a fig leaf for the occupation.”

Israel keeps up the appearance of a robust internal investigative apparatus to ward off accountability in international courts.

The commission of inquiry’s confidential file containing dossiers of alleged perpetrators of international crimes related to the Great March of Return will be handed over to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights so that it can be transferred to the International Criminal Court.

The situation in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip has been under preliminary examination by the International Criminal Court since 2015. Its chief prosecutor issued an unprecedented warning to Israeli leaders last year that they may face trial for the killings of unarmed protesters in Gaza.

Judges in The Hague have also ordered the International Criminal Court to reach out to victims of war crimes in Palestine.

Israel refused to cooperate with the UN commission of inquiry and denied entry to investigators, as it meanwhile seeks the deportation of the director of Human Rights Watch’s Jerusalem office.

But while publicly attacking the International Criminal Court, Israel is secretly cooperating with the court’s investigation into its 51-day military offensive on the Gaza Strip in 2014.

“There is concern in the political and military echelons that the court will open a criminal investigation into Israel’s actions in the Strip, a process that could lead to a wave of lawsuits against those involved and even to their arrest abroad,” the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in November.

More than 2,250 Palestinians in Gaza, including 1,462 civilians, among them at least 551 children, were killed during the summer 2014 onslaught, according to an independent investigation commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council.

Six civilians died in Israel and more than 60 Israeli soldiers died in fighting with the Palestinian resistance.

One of the commanders of that attack, former Israeli army chief Benny Gantz, seeks to unseat Benjamin Netanyahu, who was prime minister during the 2014 assault, in Israel’s general election on 9 April.

Gantz and another top Israeli officer are currently being sued for war crimes in the Netherlands by Ismail Ziada, a Palestinian-Dutch citizen whose mother and five other family members were killed in the Israeli bombing of their home in Gaza during the 2014 assault.

US threatens ICC

On Friday, the US announced that it would revoke or deny visas to “individuals directly responsible for any [International Criminal Court] investigation of US personnel,” in addition to those investigating Israel.

"Pompeo: #US to revoke or deny visas to #ICC staff who attempt to investigate or prosecute alleged abuses by Americans in #Afghanistan, elsewhere; may do same with those who try to take action against #Israel"https://t.co/nfqg0AFuze

— Matt Lee (@APDiploWriter) 15 March 2019

In November 2017 the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court initiated an investigation into alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Afghanistan since May 2003.

“If you are responsible for the proposed ICC investigation of US personnel in connection with the situation in Afghanistan, you should not assume that you still have or will get a visa or will be permitted to enter the United States,” US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday.

Associated Press reporter Matthew Lee noted that Pompeo’s comment “suggested that action may have already been taken against the ICC prosecutor.”