General Sarath Fonseka: Resignation

His Excellency the President
Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence,
Public Security, Law and Order
Presidential Secretariat
COLOMBO
12 November 2009

Your Excellency

REQUEST TO RETIRE FROM THE REGULAR FORCE OF THE SRI LANKA ARMY

1. I, General G S C Fonseka RWP RSP VSV USP rcds psc presently serving as the Chief of Defence Staff, was enlisted to the Ceylon Army on 05th Feb 1970 and was commissioned on the 01st June 1971. On the 6th Dec 2005 due to the trust and confident placed on me, Your Excellency was kind enough to promote me to the rank of Lieutenant General and appoint me as the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army in an era when the Country was embroiled with the menace of a bloody terrorism and was in a stalemate state after having toiled for a solution politically or otherwise for over 25 years without a success.

2. During my command of 3 years and 7 months, the Sri Lanka Army managed to eradicate the terrorist movement having apprehended an unbelievable stock of arms and munitions and decisively defeating the LTTE and its murderous leadership. which Your Excellency is obviously aware of. I would not be exaggerating to state that I was instrumental in leading the Army to this historic victory, of course with Your Excellency’s political support, which helped to materialize this heroic action. Though the field commanders, men and all members of the Army worked towards this common goal, it is with my vision, command and leadership that this yeomen task was achieved.

3. I do appreciate the fact that the Country and Your Excellency did recognize my services which led to me being promoted to the first ever serving four star general to command the Army, nevertheless the courses of action which initiated subsequently greatly depressed me which I have enumerated in the Annex hereto.

4. Considering the facts mentioned in the Annex and more, which I am privy to withhold, I am compelled to believe that Your Excellency and the Government has lost your trust and faith bestowed upon me for reasons best known to Your Excellency. Hence as the senior most serving military officer in the Country with 40 years of service, such a situation does not warrant a continuation of my duties any longer, thereby I have the honour to request that I be permitted to terminate my services and retire from the Regular Force of the Army with effect from 01st December 2009.

5. Furthermore I have the honour to request that on retirement Your Excellency would be kind enough to grant me sufficient security which includes trained combat soldiers, a suitable vehicle with sufficient protection (Bullet proof) and escort vehicles for my conveyances due to the fact that I am considered as one of the highest priority targets by the LTTE, which they are yet capable of achieving. Also, I wish to bring to Your Excellency’s kind notice that over 100 men, six escort vehicles and a bullet proof vehicle have been placed at the convenience of the former Commander of the Navy, Admiral WKJ Karannagoda. I presume that such arrangements would be made available to me, considering the threat factor I am facing, which Your Excellency is well aware of.

6. I would also wish to quote an example in the case of the former Indian Chief of Army Staff General A S Vadiya, instrumental in leading the Indian Army in Operation Blue Star against the Sheiks at the Golden Temple, Amristar in 1984, was assassinated whilst on retirement in 1986 purely in revenge of his victories achieved. I do not wish to experience a similar incident as I have already sustained serious injuries after the attempt on my life by a suicide cadre of the LTTE. Thereby, I am compelled to entrust you with my security which is requested for life.

7. Furthermore, I would like to emphasis on a statement made by me during my tenure as the Commander of the Army. In that, I mentioned my dislike to be in command forever and also I would ensure that my successor would not be burden with the task of war fighting, which I abided with. Hence, as I have already overstayed my retirement date by 4 years, I wish to proceed on retirement without further delays.

8. Forwarded for Your Excellency’s kind consideration please.

I have the honour to be
Your Excellency’s
Obedient Servant

G S C FONSEKA RWP RSP VSV USP rcds psc
General
Chief of Defence Staff



CONFIDENTIAL

Annex A
12 November 2009

FACTORS AFFECTING MY RETIREMENT FROM THE REGULAR FORCE OF THE ARMY

1. Various agencies misleading Your Excellency by stating a possible coup immediately after the victory over the LTTE which obviously led to a change of command in spite of my request to be in command until the Army celebrated its 60th Anniversary. This fear psychosis of a coup is well known among the defence circle.

2. Appointing an officer pending a disciplinary inquiry who performed duties only as a holding formation commander in the final battle as my successor, disregarding my recommendations to appoint Major General G A Chandrasiri as the Commander of the Army who was the then Chief of Staff and an officer with an exemplary service as the Security Forces Commander in Jaffna for over 3 years. This has already led to a deterioration of the high standards I was capable of introducing to the Army, to my bitter disappointment.

3. Appointing me as the Chief of Defence Staff, though a senior appointment to that of a service commander, with basically no authority, except for mere coordinating responsibilities in a manner which mislead the general public of the country and most members of the Armed Forces. In that the Secretary Defence pushing me to vacate the post of the Commander in just two weeks after the victory and Your Excellency insisting me to hand over duties in less than two months depriving me of my morel obligations in revamping the welfare and providing a sound administration to the men who fought a gallant battle.

4. Further, prior to my appointment I was mislead on the authority vested with the CDS. I was made to understand that the appointment carried more command responsibilities and authority than earlier, but subsequent to my appointment a letter by the Strategic Affairs Adviser to the Secretary Defence indicated that my appointment was purely to coordinate the services and not that of overall command. The letter is attached herewith for Your Excellency’s information. Such actions clearly defines Your Excellency’s and the Governments unwillingness to grant me with command responsibilities which leads to believe in a strong mistrust in me, which is most depressing after all what was performed to achieve war victory.

5. During a subsequent Service Commanders Meeting, the Secretary Defence was bold enough to state an unethical and uncalled statement by mentioning that “if operational control of all three services is granted to the CDS it would be very dangerous”, which indeed was a loss of face to me in the presences of subordinate services commanders.

6. Your Excellency, you too made a statement at the very first security council soon after the 18th of May 09 when the battled was declared over, “that no further recruitment would be necessary” and “a strong public opinion is in the making stating that the Country is in possession of a too powerful army.” It was surprising to hear such a comment from Your Excellency in spite of your repeated praise and boast of the war victory. I personally felt that Your Excellency has commenced mistrusting your own loyal Army which attained the unimaginable victory just a week ago. You again repeated the same statement even after I handed over the command. Over these comments I felt disgusted as we even insulted those who made the supreme sacrifice by such comments.

7. The present Army Commander immediately on assuming duties commenced transferring senior officers who immensely contributed to the war effort during my command tenure including those junior officers working with my wife at the Seva Vanitha Army Branch which was clearly to challenge the loyalty of officers and most discouraging to the officer corps of the Army, with a wrong signal being transmitted on my authority.

8. With a pain of mind it was noted that the same Army which gained victory for the Nation was suspected of staging a coupe and thereby alerting the Government of India once again on the 15th of October 2009, unnecessarily placing the Indian Troops on high alert. This action did tarnish the image and reputation gained by the Sri Lanka Army as a competent and professional organization who was capable of defeating a terrorist group after the Malayan Emergency, in the eyes of the World. This suspicion would have been due to the loyalty of the Sri Lanka Army towards me as its past Commander who led the Army to the historic victory.

9. During my absences from the Country (23 Oct 2009 to 5 Nov 2009) being on overseas leave, the Army Headquarters was bold enough to change the security personnel deployed at the AHQ Main Entrance and the Ministry of Defence emphasizing the withdrawal of the Sinha Regiment troops who were attached to me, as you are aware is my parent regiment and supplementing them with other regimental personnel. The Sinha Regiment troops were good enough to provide security to the Ministry of Defence for 4 years and it is surprising to note how the combat efficiency of the said troops supposed to have dropped overnight as per Secretary Defence’s opinion. Further the Sinha Regiment troops numbering a mere 4, non combatants, deployed for vehicle checking duties at the AHQ Main Entrance, were replaced by 14 armed Armoured Corps personnel, whilst a further two platoons were brought in to prevent the 4 non combat Sinha Regiment personnel performing duties, creating a mockery to the general public including to some foreign missions. This clearly indicates a questionable loyalty of troops good enough for duties for over four years purely due to the fact that the troops were from my Regiment. This also indirectly reflects mistrust on me or an indication that the persons concern wish to keep a tab on my movements and visitors to my HQ/residence which is a clear display of suspicion created on me.

10. Further on instructions of the Secretary Defence, troops from the Gajaba Regiment was brought in to the MOD complex which indicated a divide loyalty within the Army and reasons to believe that the Army now being politicized. This is being encouraged by the Army Commander too who thinks that the Armoured Corp troops should over power Sinha Regiment troops.

11. Instigating malicious and detrimental news items and rumors by interested parties including several senior government politicians which led to identify me as a traitor in spite of my personal contribution of the government to change the history of our country.

12. During my absence from the Country, an acting CDS or an officer to overlook duties was not appointed which indicates that the much spoken appointment of the CDS is unimportant to the Government and the National Security Council. If the appointment was of significant important as stated by most, it should have been imperative to appoint somebody to oversee the duties and thereby I am convinced that I have being granted with an unimportant appointment in spite of all the work done.

13. It is with sadness that I note that the ordinary Army which I toiled to transform into a highly professional outfit is now loosing its way. Increased desertions, lack of enthusiasm to enlist (A drop in enlistment rate by 50% is recorded), disciplinary problems on advocating divided commands indicates an unprofessional organization in the offing. During the last two months the members deserted are higher than the recruitment.

14.The plight of the IDPs is also a point of great concern to me. Thousands of valiant soldiers sacrificed their valuable lives to liberate these unfortunate civilians from the brutality and tyranny of the LTTE in order that they could live in an environment of freedom and democracy. Yet, today many of them are continuing to live in appalling conditions due to the lack of proper planning on the part of the government and the IDPs who have friends and relatives elsewhere in the country must be given the choice to live with them until proper demining has been done in their areas.

15.Your Excellency’s government has yet to win the peace in spite of the fact that the Army under my leadership won the war. There is no clear policy to win the hearts and minds of the Tamil people, which will surely ruin the victory, attained paving the way for yet another uprising in the future.

16. The peace dividend the whole country expected at the conclusion of the war has yet to materialize. The economic hardships faced by the people have increased while waste and corruption have reached endemic proportions; media freedom and other democratic rights continue to be curtailed. The many sacrifices the army made to end the war would not have been in vain, if we can usher in a new era of peace and prosperity to our motherland.

No victor has ever been tried before a War Crimes Tribunal - Dr. Kohana with BBC Hard Talk

No victor has ever been tried before a War Crimes Tribunal



Foreign Secretary and newly appointed Permanent Representative to the UN Dr. Palitha Kohona speaks to Hard Talk about the new challenges facing the country following the defeat of the LTTE.

There’s now evidence that KP not only procured arms for the LTTE but for other illegal and terrorist organizations in the world.

Q: The Sri Lankan government very successfully carried out the capture of the man called ‘Asia’s biggest human right’s violator’, this is seen largely as a positive direction in weakening the LTTE global network. How useful has the information received from him turning out to be in this process?

The capture of KP was certainly a major boost for the government. Now we have in our custody the man who succeeded Prabhakaran to the leadership of the LTTE and the one who had access to the LTTE’s criminal network. The LTTE had a major illicit trading empire which included drug running, gun running and people smuggling. KP was both in the centre of this as well as the major procurer of arms for the LTTE. There’s now evidence that he, not only procured arms for the LTTE but for other illegal and terrorist organizations in the world. So capturing KP was a major blow to the LTTE, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that its overseas structure has been crippled. There are many other elements who work for the LTTE and are still roaming around especially in the western countries. We have information on them and we hope to work with friendly governments in order to bring those persons within the law. As long as these persons remain free the LTTE’s criminal network will continue to function where intimidation, illegal fund raising and extortion will continue to flourish. So it is important to bring these other criminals also to book as soon as possible.

Q:As the Chief Arms dealer KP under Prabhakaran was also in charge of setting up and coordinating the LTTE overseas branches. And as the man behind the raising of funds, buying arms and shipping them so successfully, for a large part of the group’s military his contribution for the growth of the LTTE is not small. In your opinion how serious a crime are these and what form of legal action would you ideally see taking place against him?

Some of these things he’s alleged to have done are criminal activities, and therefore the full force of the law will have to bear on him. But I will leave the details to the more competent, to deal with the legal aspects.

Q:Would you say there was a change in the attitude of the global intelligence agencies following the defeat of the LTTE in Sri Lanka?

At certain times we ourselves were a little confused about the attitude of certain countries, especially certain friendly countries, because we couldn’t understand the vehemence with which they appeared to want to rescue the remnants of the LTTE, forgetting that this country had suffered for 27 years from terrorism. There wasn’t a single day in those years when a child could go to school without the parents fearing for their safety or people to work without worrying if they will return alive. Terrorism was pervasive in this society and the LTTE was at the root of it. Here we were on the verge of eliminating this group and certain countries were calling for a cessation of hostilities ostensibly to save the civilians. But the government itself succeeded in saving the vast majority of the civilians without much harm coming to them, despite the fact that it was the LTTE that had herded those civilians as a human shield. So this did cause some consternation in our ranks and we still do not understand the motive behind this. I find it very difficult to believe that it was only the humanitarian angle for the simple reason that the government’s clearly stated goal was to save the people who were held hostage by the LTTE. In any other situation I’m sure the world would have supported without any hesitation what the government was doing. But in this case there was all this ambivalence which caused us much confusion. But thankfully that episode is over and the great majority of the people held hostage are rescued and they are in government care and the LTTE is no more. Our goal now is to re-establish our relations with all the countries with whom we had enjoyed good relations in the past. We will work at it and will try to explain the reasons for what we did and when we did it. Again I must underline the fact that this country suffered from terrorism for a long time and our goal was to end that suffering. You can already see the results; just beyond here there are children playing on the Galle Face Green once again. When was the last time we saw that. I think the transformation brought about by the proactive policy adopted by the government in dealing with the LTTE has borne fruit already within a short period and I’m sure all the other issues that people are criticising us for will be resolved in the same manner.

Q:Are you saying that the pressure brought about by some of these countries have lessened now?

I think the pressure by and large is much less now, but I get the impression that some elements are trying to scratch that old wound and continue to seek to rectify whatever they failed to do, in the days leading up to the end of the conflict. We have seen the latest report by the Amnesty International which is so replete with inaccuracies. It is almost unbelievable. The way that they have compiled that report, and the manner in which an alien cultural framework has been imposed to pass judgment, have got their facts wrong, and also concocted certain facts and situations, make me wonder where this Amnesty International has gone. It used to be a respected organization.

Q:So who is really at fault in that aspect? Is it the failure of our own Missions in those countries that have failed to counter the propaganda that have so successfully come out of the LTTE funded members of the Tamil Diaspora?

I think there is a combination of factors. First and foremost there are those in the West who still feel that Asians and Africans can’t get anything right without their assistance. I have to be very blunt about it, I’ve lived in the West for 25 years and I do understand their thinking. So when we did not respond to their views I think there was a feeling of being let down, so that feeling of disenchantment continues. Secondly the LTTE and its apologists have continued to feed a certain line to the liberal minded Westerners. And they have very happily adopted this line because the liberal mindset is intrinsically inclined towards the ostensible underdog. They tend to champion the causes of the oppressed and the discriminated or even ostensibly discriminated. So this was a happy combination of circumstances for the LTTE. The LTTE’s stories were happily lapped up by certain elements of the liberal west.

Then thirdly, of course we have to work hard as a government and as a Foreign Ministry to convey our message to these elements in the West. And when we say we I should not limit this just to the Foreign Service. The LTTE has no Foreign Service but it does manage to get its message very successfully to the West. There are thousands of Sri Lankans in the West who appear to be happy to leave everything to the government. There are of course others who have worked tirelessly on behalf of the country despite living abroad. We need to get our message across to the world in a much more organized and consolidated manner so that the disinformation continuing to be propagated by the LTTE and its sympathizers can be nullified to some extent. As I said before the current mindset is a result of a combination of factors and not a result of one single element.

Q:Analysts believe that with the intelligence developed by debriefing K.P., the Sri Lankan government should be able to dismantle the entire international network of the LTTE. But would you say enough is being done by your representatives in these countries to nab the LTTE fund collectors and ensure that they are either prosecuted or extradited to Sri Lanka for trial?

It is never enough. We are working hard but we need to do more because there are times when your best is not enough. We have those working here very hard, doing late hours, and I do know that our missions diligently do as they are asked to do and work very hard but we still need to do more to ensure that the remnants of the LTTE are not allowed to gain life and rid the world of this scourge.

Q:How much harder is this task made with the refusal by certain countries to support your work? Would you say this has also been a contributing factor?

The vast majority of the countries supported our work solidly and we received absolutely and unqualified support from countries like India, Pakistan, China and Russia and the Asian region and some further afield, not just to support our task but also in the Human Rights Council. The Sri Lankan resolution won handsomely in the UN Council and those who championed the opposite view were disgraced literally. There was a clear message sent to the international community that Sri Lanka’s cause was not something to be sneered at but applauded. And that message went across very clearly from the Human Rights Council and I hope this message is heard ad taken seriously by those concerned.

Q:How much a concern would these calls of being tried for war crimes etc be today as opposed to the pressures the government felt during the UN resolution?

I think these are misguided messages for the simple reason that if you look at the history of war crimes there isn’t one instance where a winner of a war has been tried before a Tribunal. They have always been set up for losers. And if you were to take winners then the start would have to be taken elsewhere. Sri Lanka did not drop atom bombs or destroy entire cities during the war. I think these are just misguided and it is far better if we left these emotional comments aside and get back to rebuilding our society and reconciling our people and getting back to life.

Q:Similar arrests are expected of LTTE activists in the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, India and even in Scandinavia and very likely also in Norway in the coming year. What special difficulties do you foresee especially in the Scandinavian countries given their continued support towards the LTTE? How can you ensure that these countries are no longer made safe havens for senior LTTErs?

We will continue to work with them. I would never say there was no support. I wouldn’t say that the LTTE was ever endorsed by Norway; they were the acknowledged facilitator of the peace talks and their argument was that as facilitator it was not in a position to take sides. Our goal it to get all our friends on board to get back to our old friendships before terrorism raised its head.

Q:A statement issued by US Assistant Secretary of State Bob Blake following a meeting with the Tamil Diaspora in the US, had gone on to recommend that the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil diaspora community in America should ‘engage one another on political reconciliation and reconstruction’. What in your opinion is the necessity to ‘engage’ the Tamil diaspora in the US when the more practical approach would have been to directly engage in talks with the Tamils living in Sri Lanka’s North and East? Is this a situation that the government is comfortable with?

I have my own views on that. The government has engaged expatriate Tamils in a very constructive manner. The government in February brought in a representative group of Tamils with whom we had a dialogue for 2 days. We continue to do that. Every time the Foreign Minister or I go overseas we make it a point to talk to Tamil representatives, especially in countries where there is a large concentration of Sri Lankan Tamils. We continue to do that in the hope that we may win back as many of our people. Our approach has succeeded to a great deal. Today we have many Tamils inquiring about investing in Sri Lanka about recovering their lost properties. I learnt from the BOI recently that there are 31 buildings coming up in Colombo all being built by expat Tamil people. Our efforts to engage them is certainly bearing fruit. Of course there is an element that will continue to harbour hatred towards Sri Lanka. They were the militants, who supported the LTTE and terrorized their own people to collect funds for the LTTE. Today there is no reason for their existence so they will continue to exert unnecessary pressure. So my response to Ambassador Blake is that we will continue to engage the Tamils and we hope that may will return. They may not all come here to live.

The other point s that there is this thinking that all our problems can be solved by applying a political solution. I fail to see the logic behind this. Every successive government tried such a political solution but each approach was rejected by the LTTE. When we know through experience that every effort failed not through a failure to try but despite all efforts it is a little superficial to suggest that a political solution will solve all our problems. So I’m not particularly convinced about this approach.

The suggestion appears to be that there is a problem with the Tamil people. Again I don’t subscribe to that. The problem was with the LTTE and not the Tamil speaking people. If there were a problem with them why have 54% of the entire Tamil speaking people of this country migrated to Sinhala speaking areas? They did it on their own. If they had a problem why did they voluntarily come to these areas? I think it is a wrong construction to assume that the problems in Sri Lanka were constructed of some political vacuum.

If we can treat all people with dignity and give everyone equal opportunity we don’t have to worry about the political solution. Anyway where are we going to apply this solution? Are we going to do that to the 54% of those living in and around Colombo or those in the North and East? In the North the entirety of the Tamil population is 750,000. There were 300,000 in the Wanni area who are now in the camps. There’s no one outside the Wanni area. The total number in the Jaffna peninsula is miniscule compared to the rest of the island. I think it is easy to suggest that a political problem will solve, when, even if we have problems, they are certainly not in an political form. Like in every other country people have problems with job opportunities or getting children to school etc. We need to address them but not through an ethnic approach but by giving everyone an equal opportunity.

Q:Then how should we treat the All Party Representative Committee process that is seeking such a solution?

The APRC process was begun to look at certain changes to the Constitution. These will be changes that will have the endorsement of the bulk of the political spectrum of the country. That was the objective behind setting up the APRC so that the government could carry the vast majority of the people with it with the changes envisaged. We made the mistake in the past of trying to impose the solution from the top. But on this occasion President decided that any changes would carry the majority support.

Q:The Indian High Commissioner’s message in Colombo on the occasion of the Independence Day conveyed that a "broad-based political settlement" of the ethnic conflict would enable the Rs.500-crore relief, reconstruction and rehabilitation package for the displaced. Does this mean the relief and reconstruction package would come only when a broad based political settlement is in place?

I don’t think. India has been very supportive of our issues. We are confident of this support. Their own suggestion is that we should implement the 13th amendment. And the President has said he will. I don’t think India has gone beyond that in their discussions.

Q: How do you see the continued ‘concern’ shown by the international community towards the situation of the IDP’s?

The cross party delegation from the House of Commons publicly said that these camps were better than they had seen elsewhere. I think its phenomenal that we have been able to provide housing, food and medical care within such a short period. This achievement can’t be compared with any other situation in the world. Outsiders are just finding new reasons for finding fault with us. The latest is the rains. Of course the conditions would deteriorate. When the government asked the international agencies in paving the paths and roads in the camps they refused on grounds that these would be converted to permanent camps. Today the same agencies are complaining that the roads are unusable. The same with the lavatories. They will continue to criticize us because they’re determined to continue that bitterness and hatred.

http://www.dailymirror.lk/DM_BLOG/Sections/frmNewsDetailView.aspx?ARTID=58610

I have a dream in Sri Lanka!

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.

Go back to Killinochchi, go back to Mulutivu, go back to Trincomalee, go back to Batticaloa, go back to Jafna, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

I say to you today, my friends, so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the Sri Lankan dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."

I have a dream that one day Tamils of North of Sri Lanka and the Sinhalese of South will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day, LTTE with its vicious racists, with its Tamil Diaspora having their lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification; one day right there in Sri Lanka, little Tamil boys and Tamil girls will be able to join hands with little Sinhala/Muslim boys and Sinhala/Muslim girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together.

This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the Sri Lanka with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring."

And if Sri Lanka is to be a great nation this must become true. So let freedom ring from the Central hilltops of Sri Lanka. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of Dumbara. Let freedom ring from the Jungles of Mulativu!

Let freedom ring from the North of Sri Lanka!

Let freedom ring from the South of Sri Lanka!

But not only that; let freedom ring from East of Sri Lanka!

Let freedom ring from West of Sri Lanka!

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Nuwara-Eliya. From every mountainside of Badulla, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, Tamil men and Sinhala men, Hindus and Buddhists, Muslims and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

Dayan Jayatilleka: From Geneva to Sri Lanka

Interview with Dayan Jayatilleka from Centre for Policy Alternatives on Vimeo.

August 1, 2009 at 6:41 pm

Recorded on 31st July 2009, this was the first interview on video given by Dayan Jayatilleka after he was asked to quit his position as Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva a few weeks ago. Going into the reasons behind his sudden sacking, the interview interrogates his most contentious submissions regarding the 13th Amendment, his take on the current Presidency and future prospects for peace in Sri Lanka, key memories of his sojourn in Geneva including the epic Human Rights Council sessions and other issues related to politics and democracy. I also ventured to ask some impertinent questions about his love life, given that for the duration of the interview, he was flanked by his wife Sanja.

Dayan’s been a regular voice on Groundviews. In addition to contributing over 30 articles to Groundviews, Dayan has penned hundreds of detailed comments and generated tens of thousands of pageviews.

When the former President of Sri Lanka Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunge wrote to Groundviews in response to Lasantha Wickremetunge’s murder, it was Dayan to whom she addressed her comment to. Dayan’s response triggered off a critical debate with one of Sri Lanka’s leading bloggers on the freedom of access to communities displaced by war, which at the time was on-going and increasing in its ferocity. More recently, in Taking a page from Chechnya: Sri Lanka’s insincere constitutional reform and its apologists, Dayan engaged with another well known online identity in Sri Lanka, Aacharya. Two recent articles that generated a lot of debate that also featured Dayan’s input were,

Out in the Wilderness — Dayan Jayatilleka on 13th Amendment and getting sacked by Boggles
Sending Dayan home: the triumph of folly in Sri Lankan politics?

With Dayan’s departure from Geneva, Groundviews loses a unique perspective into the workings of an opaque regime. Nevertheless, the content generated by him or on account of him on Groundviews is an unparalled public record of historic interventions in Geneva, as well as insights into the policies and practices of the Rajapakse regime domestically. Going back to his first submission in July 2008, one can guess why the Rajapakse regime finds men like Dayan, once useful, now terribly inconvenient.

Don’t Lose the Peace
Xenophobia, cultural or otherwise, is profoundly counter-productive for winning the war as well as the peace. Scholarly and scientific research has shown that creativity and innovation in all fields takes place not so much from within the bowels of homogeneous and unchanging cultures but precisely where cultures interface, interact, exchange and cross-fertilize. Sir Arthur C Clarke correctly observed that Sri Lanka contains the greatest cultural diversity in the most compressed space, which is a source of conflict but potentially also of great creativity. Unless we embrace pluralism, learn to celebrate the treasure that is our own diversity, and tap into it as an energy source for advance, we shall certainly be unable compete regionally or globally. Worst of all we shall not be using all our cultural capacities, making the best of our endowments, making the best of ourselves.

The best performing of our youngsters, the brightest minds coming out of our universities with First classes, are migrating. Unless we can retain them by creating an environment in which the intelligent discerning internationally aware individual can flourish, we may win the war but lose the capacity to re-build, regenerate. Post war Sri Lanka must not be like pre-war Sri Lanka, because that order was so flawed as to contain the seeds of war. As we reconstruct we must restructure, transform, learning from past mistakes.

Similarly, post war Sri Lanka must be unlike wartime Sri Lanka. If ideologies of resentment and closure prevail over those of conciliation and openness, we shall be unable to manage the problem of the hemorrhage of quality human resources, which in turn will decide whether we shall develop or decline as a country.

It will serve little purpose if we win the war and lose the peace.

Dayan Jayatilleka From Geneva to Sri Lanka

A national icon has been ripped off for personal favorations. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka is an indispensable Firewall for Sri Lanka.

He defended Sri Lanka against unintended Human Rights violations, anti-Sri Lanka propaganda in the international frontline. He lead and won UNHRC debate on war crime charges against Sri Lanka during last stage of war against LTTE terrorism, later he was sacked by the same government he defended. The war could continue untll end thanks to the work done by Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka and team at UNHRC. There was enormous pressure to Sri Lanka at last stage of war. He blocked all threats and gave opportunity for our soldiers to totally wipe out LTTE leadership.
Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka is a part of Sri Lankan victory against terrorism. What we now need is to reorganize the corrupted (political) system. Thank you Dr. Dayan, and Prof. Rajiva for the tremendous job at UNHRC in Geneva!

Dr. Dayans termination is a huge mistake and an embarrasment to Sri Lanka.

When right, keep it right. When wrong, make it right!

Sexless Lankans

Nanny governments won’t do
Saturday, August 1, 2009 Leave a Comment
By Gamini Weerakoon

(August 02, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Holy smokes! The Rajapakse government in a seizure of morality — against booze, tobacco and sex — last week announced measures to ‘wipe out the menace of alcohol and tobacco,’ pornography on TV, screening of ‘adults only films’ throughout the country, subjected all commercial telecasts on local TV to be approved by government before telecasting, as well as advertisements on radio and newspapers to be approved by the Public Performances Board. Government will also prohibit printing of lewd publications and newspapers. The Public Performances Board Act is to be given more powers.

Uneducated move

In addition to all these measures, the Education Department made an extremely uneducated move — banning mobile phones in schools after a girl who was found with a mobile phone, committed suicide in school. On Monday it was reported that a 15-year-old schoolboy of Imaduwa who had been punished by his father for smoking a cigarette in a toilet too had committed suicide. The road to hell it appears is paved with good intentions of moral guardians.

Former President of the Rationalist Society, Prof. Carlo Fonseka having donned the garb of moral crusader, as Chairman of the National Authority on Tobacco and Alcohol at a press conference on Tuesday declared that consumption of tobacco had been considerably reduced according to a Global Youth Tobacco Survey.

Tobacco consumption among school children had declined ‘from 5 per cent in 1997 to 0.9 per cent while consumption among adults had dropped from 13 per cent in 1997 to 5 per cent at present.’ From now on serious steps would be taken to reduce tobacco and alcohol consumption focused on preventing violation of the National Authority on Tobacco and Alcohol (NATA) Act, Fonseka declared.

Great is the Chinthanaya

Like all appointees of the Rajapakse government Fonseka paid lavish tributes to President Rajapakse who he said was the first national leader to include anti-alcohol, anti-tobacco and anti-drug policies as a high national priority. Pity, he forgot to mention names of pioneers of the Temperance Movement such as Anagarika Dharmapala who campaigned vigorously for temperance at the height of British imperialism when revenue from taverns was considered vital to British interests.

True enough they did not hold ‘national office’ at that time but it was manifold more difficult a task than issuing presidential declarations.

This reduction in the amount of smoking by schoolboys claimed would be much more convincing had the learned professor told us of the methodology deployed in the survey and the size of the sample studied. Quite often such surveys are like opinion surveys conducted by ruling parties before polls. To determine the smoking habits of little rascals puffing away in closed toilets is no easy task.

As for the tom-tom beating of the success of Mathata Thitha (full-stop to intoxication) in all corners of Lanka, the Professor faces the impossible task of contradicting the statistics cited by the Minister of State Revenue and Finance, Ranjith Siyambalapitiya in Parliament. Production of liquor, the Minister said, had gone up by 16.9 percent in 2006 from the previous year (when the MT programme commenced); by 30.2 percent in 2007; 19.4 per cent in 2008.

Production of local arrack which stood at 38.4 million litres in 2005 rose to 44.9 m litres in 2006; 50.88 m litres in 2007 and 45.9 million litres in 2008. Foreign liquor sales had shown similar trends. Little wonder wags at the city’s bars say that Mathata Titha resulted in Tithata Matha (Full-stop was drunk) and now it is Mathata Hitha (Longing to drink). Arrack sales it should be noted is only a fraction of kasippu or moonshine sales — the poor man’s drink.

Sexless Lankans

All Sri Lankan governments have been increasingly opposed to sex. The accepted principle is: We Sri Lankans don’t have sex. We simply multiply like amoeba by simply splitting up into two or more amoeba. So no one will raise an eyebrow over the ban on ‘adults only’ films or pornography on TV. It will be well accepted by the pious with acclaim even though they will be longing to see such sex films.

Morality or politics

The danger however is about all commercial telecasts as well as radio and TV advertisements being subject to scrutiny of the Public Performances Board (PPB). Is this move made on behalf of safeguarding ‘the morals of the nation’ or using morality as a fig leaf to safeguard the interests of the government? Does it mean that political advertisements such as those appearing in newspapers prior to elections too will be subject to rulings of the PPB? Is this preparation for elections?

Maniacs and nymphomaniacs

And what of the ban on cellular phones in schools by the Education Department, the museum of the fossilised relics of the nation like school principals? To them, cellular phones in the hands of girls or boys are dangerous weapons which could turn the girls into nymphomaniacs and boys into sex maniacs. They don’t see the utility value such as calling parents at home or their vehicles parked far away from school gates.

Perhaps time has dimmed their memories of such popular ditties half a century ago such as:

Telephone cumbi digge aalay karanne,

Meet me at the Savoy, kiya,

OK my boy kiya,

Denne anney…

Those were the days of land phones — one phone to about a thousand people but still the mating calls went through. With millions of cellular phones around — as much as ball point pens — what can the fossils in this so called Education Department do against youthful desires?

History has shown us that good governance is only possible through conviction and persuasion; not by rules, regulations and legislative enactments. Nanny governments, however well intentioned, have never been successful..

source: http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2009/08/nanny-governments-wont-do.html

Dayan Jayatilleke too won a “war ” for the President, in the diplomatic front

Posted on July 20th, 2009
By Charles.S.Perera
It is a contradiction of the President Mahinda Rajapakse, who had on the one hand most rightly promoted the leadership of the Government Armed Forces in recognition of their heroic contribution to save Sri Lanka from the perils of terrorism, and on the other hand to have “sacked” the most distinguished , brilliant, forthright, and an outspoken diplomatic worrier who won another “war” for him in the diplomatic front in Geneva.

It was a great fortune that we had Dayan Jayatilleke in Geneva at a time when the International Community was all out to take revenge from the Government of Sri Lanka for nothing else but for defeating the attempt of the terrorists to set up a Tamil Home Land in the North of Sri Lanka.

Dayan Jayatilleke a diplomat of exceptional quality, defeated the aims of another sort of terrorists who made all efforts to give a life line to Prabhakaran and his terrorist cohorts, and having failed in that effort to accuse the Sri Lanka Government Forces for war crimes.

It was indeed the most remarkable event in the annuls of the history of Sri Lanka for the Government Forces to have eliminated terrorism that had caused so much of material damage and human loss to the country, and was on the verge of breaking away a part of its territory to create a Tamil Eelam State.

The Sri Lanka terrorists , who were not terrorists for the International Community, used, guns, live suicide bombs, claymore bombs , snipers, and grenade lobbers , whereas the terrorists Dayan Jayatilleke had to fight used other weapons such as , verbal guns, artillery of false information, cannons of official positions, backed by political time bombs, personal mines of IMF Loans, GSP+ , heavy weapons from UK , France, and USA in the form of Foreign Ministers, to stop the military operations against the terrorists and then to discredit the government, bring it on to its knees, and finally accuse it for war crimes.

Navy Pillay like Prabhakaran the terrorist would not accept defeat, and when the resolution against Sri Lanka was lost in the UNHuman Rights Council, she wanted to make a come back to the battle ground with more false figures gathered from the terrorist website to accuse once again the Government Forces for war crimes. But our bold worrier Dayan Jayatilleke was ready to take any one head on in the diplomatic foray.

Dayan Jayatilleke’s diplomatic clashes to avoid bringing discredit to our government, and shame to our armed forces which had sacrificed large numbers of men, and risked their lives to end the cancer of terrorism that had eaten into the flesh of our motherland was also fraught with danger. The gratitude the President showed to Dayan Jaytilleke who valiantly faced the onslaught of determined International Community to bring the government before a tribunal accused for war crimes, was simply to have sacked him.

If giving credit to this hero who had fought the invisible forces unleashed by the Western powers and the UN, is to throw him out like a used dirty chiffon, it would remain in the history of our nation as a shameful aftermath for a glorious battle fought with brilliance, intelligence , and vibrant verbal force for the glory of the motherland.

All the laurels won by the President Mahinda Rajapakse for his great contribution for saving the country from terrorism, is blown away in the dry wind of shameless ingratitude by this one act.

What could be the great wrong committed by Dayan Jaytilleke for him to deserve this inglorious end of a remarkable diplomatic carrier in the service of his country ?

When I wrote to a friend on the subject asking him whether it was a decision made by the President, and if so whether it is not an unpardonable error. He wrote to me giving details of the “erratic” political path traversed by Dayan Jayatilleke , and explained that he as a Diplomat representing Sri Lanka should have been more careful making statements which may have contradicted the President’s not yet decided views on the 13 Amendment, and that his statement on Israel was an embarrassment to the President.

I disagree on both counts. On the 13 Amendment Dayan Jayatilleke had made his personal views as any other citizen even if his official capacity demanded him to be more cautious. He has a right to express his view on a matter that affects the future of Sri Lanka which he officially represents in a foreign land.

With regard to his statement on Israel, what he said is not altogether wrong, but it may be taken as a statement made without reflection as Dayan Jayatilleke is not a hypocrite and calls a spade a spade. And yet that was not an irreparable damage.

As to his erratic political path , that was the past. We always learn from our past to relate ourselves to the future. Many are those who had followed erratic paths, but it should not stand on the way to judge them for what they are now.

The President should not have precipitated to take a very unfair and unjust decision to sack Dayan Jayatilleke for those statements made in his private capacity. Even many soldiers may have been allowed to die in vein by sheer miscalculation of military strategies by the Army Commanders. The bus load of Navy personnel massacred by the terrorists at Habarana was due to the negligence of the Security staff. And so was the terrorist suicide attack of the Anuradhapura Air Force Camp where the security guards were said to have been watching a television show.

If those incidents had been overlooked in view of the over-roll performance of the Army, why was Dayan Jayatilleke not given such consideration for the greater services he had contributed for Sri Lanka at a very critical time.

And Sri Lanka is still not out of the tunnel as far as the vicious intentions of the International Community and Navy Pillay are concerned. Therefore, we still want Dayan Jayatilleke to be in his Diplomatic post in Geneva. He was a diplomat respected by his counterparts in Geneva and his removal in this manner may antagonise the diplomats of those friendly countries that voted to defeat the resolution of the UNHRC.

The Times mirrors the Tigers

Posted on July 14th, 2009
Rajiva Wijesinha Secretary General Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process
The international community was horrified by news reports in the Times of London on July 9th 2009 that over 1400 people were dying each week in Welfare Centres in Sri Lanka. The Times continues to conceal its sources. This time the allegation is attributed to ‘Senior international aid figures’, though the figure was decried as ‘Ridiculous’ by the UN Resident Coordinator in Colombo.

An even more ‘senior international aid figure’ Sir John Holmes was even more contemptuous of sensationalistic journalism, when he pointed out that Sri Lanka had won a war which many foreign journalists had come out to cover, and therefore they had to produce something, to justify themselves.

Thus the Channel 4 stories of rape and sexual abuse and the Guardian Chamberlain assertion that 13 women had been found with short haircuts and slit throats. The Times however has gone further than all these, in conducting a sustained vitriolic campaign against the Sri Lankan government with no regard for either truth or logic. Their use of language too, though skilful, exemplifies their determination to distort, as when they tried to attribute to the UN their claim that there had been over 20,000 civilian deaths during the conflict against the Tigers. And they are obviously terrified of anyone who might contradict them, for they said falsely, in a wholly fraudulent article on May 21st, that ‘The Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights, which set up the camps, did not return calls asking for comment yesterday’.

I then wrote to the Editor as follows – ‘In the first place, this Ministry is not responsible for setting up the camps, though we are responsible for protection issues in them. Secondly, May 20th was a public holiday, so perhaps you could ask your correspondent which number he called, at which he left a message asking for comment on his story. You should also ask him why he did not call me on my mobile, on which another correspondent of yours interviewed me at length in February, only to produce a report very different from that of the Indian correspondent who was in my room at the time and listened to the interview.

The substance of the article indicates why your correspondent feared to contact either me or my Minister, who tells me he was called up on the 21st, and answered queries on this subject, well after you had gone to print.

Of course I did not get a reply, and the Times absolutely refused to meet me when I was in England a couple of weeks later, though four other newspapers found time for me at short notice. Channel 4 and Sky News also dodged, though the BBC kindly slotted me in. But refusal to allow access is of course a well known dodge, which the Times attributes to its enemies whilst sedulously practicing this itself.

In short, the Times gets away with lies and refusal to engage or discuss when they come across someone who actually knows what is going on. But such cowardice is understandable in view of the scattershot way they produce arguments.

Initially they declared that they had got to a figure of 20,000 by adding – to the 7,000 they claimed the UN had reported from the beginning of the year until April – an average of 1000 a day for the first couple of weeks in May. This begged the question that the 7,000 had only been found in what were claimed to be leaks from the UN, and that nowhere else were there allegations of 1000 deaths a day in May. Indeed the Tamilnet accounts, which would generally present what might be termed the worst case scenario, alleged far fewer casualties.

Later the Times changed its story to claim that the figure of 20,000 was based on extrapolations from the number of bodies brought in to health centres, though they also noted that they multiplied the actual bodies brought in by five or so to reach their figure of 20,000.

Now, six weeks later, assuming their readers would have forgotten their earlier pitiful justifications, with Sir John Holmes also categorically rejecting the sleight of hand by which they had sought to associate the UN with their lies, they have yet another explanation for their nonsensical assertion. This time they declare that ‘Subsequent aerial photographs of beach graves, revealed in The Times, suggested that the figure was more than 20,000.’

So they now admit that their first mathematical calculations, based on a fraudulent UN figure for four months with a whimsical average for two weeks thereafter was nonsense. They also doubtless hope that no one will notice that the aerial photographs they rely on are of beach graves, whereas most of the fighting before May took place far away from that beach.

They also admit that their next exercise in mathematical fraud, multiplying bodies they themselves never saw to reach the number they first thought of, was also a lie. How the beach graves they revealed amount to the figure they now only suggest is not explained. Instead that figure will simply become a statistic to lurk behind their latest lie, 1,400 deaths a week in the camps, amounting to over 15,000 now if they started counting from the time of the great exodus, when the Sri Lankan forces managed to rescue over 100,000 of those held by the Tigers.

No wonder then that one senior Sri Lankan journalist said, ‘I have serious doubts over the latest statements. What we’re seeing is that the LTTE (the Tigers) and the Times are in some respects mirror images of each other.’ Senior incidentally is one of the words the Times uses when it wants to pretend that someone who said what it wanted said is in fact respectable. They trot out phrases like senior journalist and senior international aid worker to clothe their nakedness, hoping that then other papers will take up the claim and ignore that the only evidence for the bizarre lies the Times produces is the fertile imagination of Times journalists.

Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary General
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process

Sri Lankan man gives up life for squirrel

www.chinaview.cn 2009-07-13 13:04:19

COLOMBO, July 13 (Xinhua) -- A 40-year-old Sri Lankan man who saved a squirrel from drowning lost his life on Saturday, an English newspaper reported on Monday. According to the Daily Mirror, Tilak Rajakaruna was climbing out after cleaning his 60-foot-deep (about 18.29 meters) garden well in a northern Colombo suburb called Kandana, when a squirrel fell into the well from an overhanging branch. Rajakaruna climbed back down to rescue it. He caught the squirrel and put it in the pockets of his shorts and started to climb up again. However, the squirrel came out and bit his hand, making him lose his grip and fall to the bottom of the well striking his head.

Rajakaruna's wife who was holding the rope rushed him to RagamaBase Hospital with the help of some neighbors but he succumbed to his injuries at the hospital. Doctors from the hospital reported that the death was due to head injuries caused by the fall

The 13th Amendment is a bad idea

Thursday, July 9, 2009 Leave a Comment
A response to Dayan Jayatilleka

By Malinda Seneviratne

(July 10, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) There can be a military victory over a military challenge but there cannot be a purely military victory over a political challenge. An enemy army can and must be defeated, an armed opponent can be killed, but a political challenge requires a political response and an idea can be defeated only by another idea. – Dayan Jayatilleka

This is old. I would say it is basic to political science. However, like all things that stand the test of time, it is profound. Dayan is absolutely right. He is erroneous however in the application of this principle (see his piece in The Island of July 9, 2009 titled ‘The 13th Amendment and the international system’).

What is his reference?

Let me quote:

"One of the basic errors of Malinda and his co-thinkers is the conclusion that Tamil ethnic politics died on the banks of the Nandikadal. The idea of Tamil Eelam can be defeated only by the counter-idea of reformed and restructured Sri Lankan state which may remain unitary but contains an irreducible autonomous political space for the Tamil people of the North and East. It cannot be defeated by the idea of Sri Lanka shorn of even the 13th amendment. Armed Tamil secessionism can and has been defeated, but the politics of collective Tamil identity cannot be militarily defeated or suppressed; it can only be politically addressed."

Dayan’s defense of the 13th Amendment and his plea for its implementation is predicated on the validity of the Tamil (chauvinist) demands, or, to put it another way, the erroneous and mischievous assertion of the equation that equates ‘grievance’ + ‘aspiration’ to ‘legitimate demand’. More on this later.

He defends the hurried and coercively introduced 13th Amendment as a (necessary?) ‘Caesarean surgical intervention to bring forth a power sharing solution thwarted from 1957’ and pats himself on the back for having predicted the same. He attributes that ’ to extra-parliamentary lobbying: ‘none of the proposals for moderate power-sharing were voted down democratically’. Lobbying, Dayan knows, is part of democratic process. India dropping parippu and a lot more besides is not.

Dayan enumerates the advantages of going with the 13th, painting a happily-ever-after picture of internal stability, international backing and communal harmony with an equally ‘happy’ division of the Tamil Diaspora (that’s a racist wish, I believe), a bridging of the North-South gap and a downing of the anti-Sri Lanka global campaign. These are ‘strategic benefits’ which Dayan believes will accrue automatically if we implemented the 13th. He implies that pandering to Eelamist mythology and burning defensible historical transcript is a small price to pay for all these goodies.

First of all, I don’t think that the goodies are there for the taking. There are no ‘friends’ or ‘enemies’ in the international, just entities playing cards as per self-interest. There is a give and take and there’s a lot of arm-twisting too. Dayan knows this and Dayan knows that India is not the do-gooder that India likes us to believe she is. Yes, there is a ‘World System’, I acknowledge. That is however not an entity that was god-made and meant to be immobile from Day One to Day Last. Things change. To accept current realities as overarching forces best met with acquiescence is a legitimate option, but honour, dignity and intellectual honesty demand that error in perception be resisted. That however, is not an important entry in the diary of a politician. I believe it was one of the First Nations in the Americas that predicated policy decision on a consideration of impact on the seventh generation down the line. Resolving for aspirations that infringe on the rights of other communities and for grievances that can be addressed in other ways may appease ‘international pals’ in the here-and-now but will amount to little more than shoving a bunch of garbage under the carpet.

Dayan, so adept at meeting, countering and triumphing over Western mischief-making with respect to Sri Lanka, is surprisingly meek when it comes to Eelamist posturing regarding history.

Perhaps this is because he is fascinated with the notion of ‘autonomous political space’ for the Tamil people in the North and East. I will go with ‘political space’ but there is nothing to support ‘autonomy’ as per defined territory. The provincial boundaries were arbitrarily drawn, to begin with. The Eastern Province is demographically divided roughly into three equal parts, and in terms of territory, ‘Sinhala’ areas far outweigh Tamil and Muslim areas put together. As for legitimacy of claim following historical evidence, it is at best paltry. The archaeological record does not support the thesis. We could of course set the take-off point closer to the present, but then again, we do know that Chelvanayagam was not a Ceylonese, that Ponnambalam Ramanathan’s grandfather did not have an address in this country and we have to make note of the fact that the results of the first census were surreptitiously ‘disappeared’. Oh yes, Tamil chauvinism has a long history and one that pre-dates the horrendous disenfranchisement of Tamils in the estates and Bandaranaike’s swabasha adventure.

Dayan points out that our so-called ‘friends’ in the international community want the 13th implemented, citing statements made. Even if we were generous and grant that all these statements were/are made in good faith, the fact remains that they are based on their perceptions of our problem, something that is largely influenced by three factors: a) strong and sustained propaganda by the Eelam lobby, b) an ‘intellectual’ community (mostly of Marxist-Leninist leanings) that was and still is quite quiescent, and c) governments and political leaders who were operating throughout in the here-and-now mode.

Bandaranaike cowed down to ‘extra-parliamentary pressure’, yes. But it was not a matter of going through with the Chelva-Banda pact or dumping it unceremoniously. There was a compelling argument for a instituting a reason-privileging exercise in considering ‘Tamil grievances’. He could have instituted a historical audit into claims and thereafter addressed that which was legitimate and ignore that which was not. His successors could have too. That they did not is a pity, and does not in any way make a case for Caesarian section or the sanitization of belligerent bullying on the part of India. Or anyone else.

I agree with Dayan that the Sri Lanka state needs structural reform. There can be structural reform without compromising its centralized form. Devolution of power is not only antithetical to current global trends (for those who are fascinated by the ‘Global’ with a capital G) it is not a necessary precondition for reconciliation of Sinhala and Tamil communities. That is like saying that the United States should devolve power to the African Americans, Hispanics and Asians in clearly demarcated pieces of land in order to obtain reconciliation.

There is nothing wrong in any community wanting legitimate political space, in wanting equal rights as citizens, but autonomous political space is another matter altogether. That can be an aspiration, sure, but not delivering that aspiration is not a crime against humanity and not necessarily undemocratic.

All communities should have ‘political space’ to air grievances, assert identity and obtain relief where infringement occurs. This requires an overall democratization of our institutions. This is where my argument for the 17th Amendment is not the apple against the 13th Amendment orange as per Dayan’s characterization makes sense. The 1978 constitution is anti-citizen, first and foremost and this is the structural anomaly that needs to be addressed most urgently. It diminishes the citizen. The 17th, flawed though it is and inadequate to boot, as Dayan correctly observes, is the only step taken in the direction of addressing this problem.

Dayan says, ‘The 17th amendment only tangentially impacts upon the crucial problem of power-sharing between centre and periphery and is therefore no substitute for the implementation of the 13th amendment.’ True. The 17th does not really impact power-sharing between centre and periphery. However, ‘power sharing between centre and periphery’ is not the ‘problem’ Dayan believes it is. There has to be more decentralization of administrative functions, a greater degree of say for citizen in decision-making etc., but the answer is not devolution as per the 13th, which, we know is essentially a mechanism for pampering local thugs and a huge burden on the public. A District Council would be far more effective, democratic and yielding ‘self-determination’ to the ordinary citizen. What the 17th, or rather a 17th Plus formulation, would do is to insulate all people from the excesses of politicians.

Reconciliation is not about pandering to ahistorical claim. Aspiration clothed as right may excite those who like masquerades and cross-dressing of course, but a nation can do better than to go overboard with such things. This is why we need to get to the basics, i.e. a historical audit of Tamil claims. If not we will condemn our children to deal with chauvinism and the violence it tends to spawn. We cannot afford, especially not after suffering immense costs in eliminating the military avatar of Eelamist posturing, to concede constitutionally the rudimentary structures that can later be the basis for a renewed journey towards Prabhakaran’s objective. Reconciliation, rather, is about coming to terms with realities, of privileging respect, affirming equal rights for all citizens and providing the necessary space for celebrating identity.

It is beholden on us then to set the record state with respect to all misconceptions about Sri Lanka and her history. I will concede that mine is ‘version’. Dayan too will have to concede that his is ‘version’ too. I am ready to support a historical audit so that the root of the demand (for ‘autonomous political space for Tamils’) can be obtained. We can’t gloss over this. We have, for too long, and have had to pay a massive price for our collective sloth as a people. We need a new embrace in this country, a citizens’ embrace. This is not the time to embrace a wasteful, ineffective and grotesque historical misadventure just so that we win some accolades from ‘friends’ abroad for a few feel-good moments.

I firmly believe that the Sinhala and Tamil people are more than ready for a reconciliation that is not bastardised by formulations promoted and established by third-rate politicians and I believe that such reconciliation (which necessitates a re-hauling of the constitution; most certainly a worthy cause to espouse) alone would win us long-term and sustainable friendships internationally.

The 13th Amendment is, in short, a ‘bad idea’ and worse, ‘an erroneous idea’. It has to be defeated.

Malinda Seneviratne is a freelance writer who can be reached at malinsene@gmail.com.

Rathnamali Gatha

Why could we not defeat LTTE for 25 years?

(By: A Retired Major General)
Last modified on: 6/29/2009 11:34:19 AM

All members of the security forces, past and present, and all citizens of this country no doubt are happy and celebrating the defeat of the LTTE, the most ruthless terrorist organization in the world, that had been a scourge not only to our country but the world for the past three decades.

Some Western nations must be unhappy that the lever they utilized to destabilize our nation is no more available for them. Locally, the stooges of those powers with vested interests too are unhappy since their peace wagon has got bogged down and off road for ever and they are unable to enjoy the free rides anymore. I have observed many of the past Commanders of all three forces who failed to achieve victory when they were at the helm of power also were among them to achieve their goals through peace means

Many a writer, including some armchair Generals has written to the press and come live on TV to tell us how the current Commanders have won the war, but none has explained why past Commanders could not or would not win the war when the LTTE was much weaker and was not well-established. If they won, perhaps, we would have saved the lives of thousands of youth of both sides and billions of rupees of our National wealth. That included the personal properties of our citizens of the North and South, and the valuable infrastructure facilities. When the North and East was burning, the retired Generals, Admirals and Air Marshals were discussing at various forums how to solve the National problem through peace negotiations, rather than advising the Commanders how to win the war in which they were inextricably engaged in. To me, it looked awkward, discouraging and meaningless in that needy hour.

Let us see why those Commanders failed to forge an end through military means when they were in power. First and foremost was the unnecessary political interference which came in many forms. Some politicians with connections with the security of the country had vested interests and were working towards achieving their aims of making money through purchase of arms and equipment for the Army, Navy and Air Force. Some Security Force Commanders who did not have the backbone either kept quiet and said yes to whatever the deals approved by the politicians, with the connivance and support of the bureaucrats in the Ministries. They too amassed wealth here and abroad. The troops in the front lines had to bear the brunt of it by getting killed using sub-standard arms and equipment and flying in obsolete aircraft bought through questionable shady deals.

Some top brass were hauled before the High Courts after their retirement and were even arrested and kept in remand. Others who still had the political backing either escaped through their cunning manoeuvring of technical points or using their ill-earned wealth by bribing politicians of the era. Thousands of troops sacrificed their lives in the arid battle fields like Pooneryn and Mullaitivu or plunged into the sea in aircraft that did not have even anti-missile protection.

Next, political interference was the denial of required manpower, arms and equipment to the Operation Commanders, quoting that the government did not have sufficient funds.

Whenever there was a respite in the war, the process of recruiting and continuous training of troops were abruptly stopped which is against all principles of maintaining combat readiness even during peace time. Once the war resumed, the field commanders were ordered to manage with what they had until the recruitment and training was complete to launch them to battle. This is what the President clearly understood through the wise counsel of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the battle hardened brother of His Excellency. Gotabaya never subjected the Service Commanders or the front line Operational Commanders to such humiliating predicament and maintained the clear cut aim of defeating the LTTE and relentlessly worked towards achieving that aim despite opposition from many quarters as well as adverse international pressure. I am certain that the Service Commanders also insisted on their own requirements forcefully without wilting to the pressure of the financial constraints which the past Commanders did not do.

I have observed that when the senior service officers were getting professionally qualified and matured towards the end of the careers, their aim was to become the Head of the Service which is quite natural. The way they set about achieving it was not in keeping with the prime interests of the country. Invariably, many past Commanders of Services became "yes men" so that they approved anything the politicians wanted done irrespective of whether they were correct or not and injurious to the National interests.

Coming back to the political interference, at one stage, a politician planned the operations to win the elections. He insisted that an objective or an area be captured before the Provincial Council Elections. The Operational Commanders short of time, manpower and equipment either reluctantly agreed knowing that the operation would fail. The Service Commanders never intervened and advised the politicians not to pursue it, since they did not want to lose the command and the ambassadorial appointment they were dreaming of. Those Operation Commanders who did not want to sacrifice their principles as well as the troops who disagreed with the political big-wigs were sidelined and sent out of the service, sometimes ignominiously.
Old school, clanism and favouritism affected the operational efficiency of the Services. If a Service Commander's successor was from the same Regiment or same clan or the same school and of the same colour, well, he was the one to command the service and he was trained and groomed accordingly without taking into his consideration IQ or combat efficiency and professional competency. He was groomed in such a way that he naturally became an "yes man" as happened to our administrative bureaucracy, which is at the bottom of the administration mess today. This was what ailed the services which contributed to the failure of past Commanders, who almost ended up with Diplomatic appointments. Only a few obviously corrupted ones were denied this perk.

Commanders of this calibre never had the determination and the National aim of defeating the LTTE on top of their career agendas. Their aim was to command the Service and end up an Ambassador and to hell with the Nation.
The handing over of weapons and money to the LTTE by the highest political authority in the country was one of the biggest blunders that was unopposed and approved by the Army Commander and a Secretary of Defence who too were Three and Four Star Generals, both of whom knew that it was wrong and injurious and detrimental to the National security. The same duo approved even a worse blunder of handing over 600 policemen in the East to the LTTE, who drained them of their blood, butchered and buried them in mass graves. How could a Commander of this calibre and their front line Operational Commanders win the war when they supported the enemy which amounted to treason? Those top brass are basking in the glow of glory with medals and honours now. What a shame.

I believe the above facts would suffice to show readers why the war was not won for 25 years, under the corrupted. bias and inefficiency of politicians, and Service Commanders. I must congratulate and admire the present Service Commanders and the frontline Operation Commanders who were not malaised with the plagues enumerated above but received unstinted support and encouragement from the Commander-in-Chief of Services as well as his brother, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, that won the historic victory for Sri Lanka.

This account is incomplete without a word of praise to General Sarath Fonseka, who is not a favourite of a group or a clan but a valiant soldier who achieved his aim through determination and perseverance. He is rewarded for choosing front line Commanders who joined the Army in the infancy of the LTTE and grew up getting battered and hardened along with the growing LTTE which grew almost to a conventional Army with air and sea wings. Giving credit to international situation and their attitude towards Sri Lanka for annihilation and defeat of the LTTE to me is belittling of valiant achievement of Sons of Sri Lanka

Source: http://www.defence.lk/new.asp?fname=20090629_02

The politics of postwar Sri Lanka

Saturday, 27 June 2009

By Dayan Jayatilleka

As Paul Berman once wrote, "somewhere in the world it is always 1941". There comes a time in the life of every society when it is faced with an existential threat or challenge. It is the social forces or elements that rise up to this challenge and successfully overcome this threat that then have the power as well as the legitimacy to place their stamp on what comes after. Those who stood on the wrong side of history, or never rose to the occasion, or who abandoned the struggle partway, or simply failed; the defeated enemy, the collaborators, the appeasers and the fence-sitters — and these are not one and the same — all forfeit the chance to place their values, ideas and programs as the leading ones of the social order that follows the great test.

The truths are threefold. The truth is that the Tigers and the Tamil ultra-nationalists overestimated themselves and underestimated the Sinhalese, due to arrogance and racism. The last stage of the war saw a titanic clash of wills, between, on the one hand, the Tigers, the Tamil Diaspora and overseas Tamils from Canada to Chennai, their Western supporters and the Western media, and on the other, the Sinhala people, the armed forces, the Rajapakse leadership, a thin stratum of heroic Tamil rebels against Prabhakaran, and several friendly states. The Balasinghams wrote a book about the Tamil Eelam struggle with a neo-Nietzschean title, The Will to Freedom. The truth is that from a classically Nietzschean perspective, the Sinhalese Will to Power, i.e. to "prevail over" to "overcome" (which was Nietzsche’s meaning) on and over this small island, was and will in the final analysis always be, cannot but be, greater than that of the Tamils to secede. The truth is also that the Tigers, weakened by an Eastern Tamil rebellion, were defeated by a largely Sinhalese army, sustained by the Sinhala people whose collective will refused to break under decades of suicide bombings, body bags coming home to villages and assassinations of their leaders; the Sinhalese who, this time around, like the paradigmatic Silindu in Woolf’s Village in The Jungle, finally turned on their tormentors and blew them away.

If the social bloc that dominates the UNP wished a postwar Sri Lanka of their liking they should not have repeatedly blown the chances they had of defending the country’s territorial unity, integrity and sovereignty — but blow them it did.

JR Jayewardene did want to win the war, though Lalith Athulathmudali did say that operations were intended to prove to the Tigers that they had no military option. JRJ was perhaps the only UNP president that wanted to win the war and tried to, but he and his administration did not have the basic capacity or intelligence (a) to suppress Black July ’83 (b) not to tamper with the rules of the democratic game to such a degree that it split the Sinhalese and destabilized the domestic situation and (c) to maintain the kind of political relationship with India that would have permitted it to win the war and pre-empted Indian pre-emption, so to speak.

The Premadasa presidency had an admirable degree of multiethnic, multicultural pluralism in its make up and dominant ideology but it allowed the war effort to be paralyzed by infighting within the officer corps and under-funded by bureaucrats with a possible bias or lack of commitment. It made the right decision in putting Gen Denzil Kobbekaduwe in charge of the military effort but it did not consider a military victory possible or, on balance, desirable. (I was possibly the only one in the Premadasa camp whose policy memoranda to him pushed for a military victory. This heartbreaking effort is reflected in my book The Travails of a Democracy: Unfinished war, Protracted Crisis, Vikas, New Delhi 1995).

The UNP’s final chance came with the Prime Ministership of Mr. Ranil Wickremesinghe who opted for a lopsided Ceasefire agreement at a time when the balance of forces had turned dramatically against the LTTE due to the successful operations of the Special Forces LRRP and the global anti-terrorist shift due to 9/11. The CFA permitted the buildup of the proto state structure of the Tigers and humiliated the Sri Lankan armed forces.

The moderate, Westernized wing of the SLFP had its chance to win the war and re-mould Sri Lanka in accordance with its more reformist pluralist ideology but it threw the chance away. The re-taking of Jaffna was vitiated by the failure to cut off the LTTE’s retreat thereby permitting the Tigers to escape together with large number of civilians, base themselves in Mullaitivu, regroup and make a dramatic comeback. The strategy was one of taking territory rather than annihilating the enemy; recruitment was negatively affected by campaigns such as Sudu Nelum, Thavalama and the efforts of NIPU etc; corruption was rampant in the sphere of procurement. Above all, there was no commitment to a strategic goal of destroying the enemy but rather to one of driving the Tigers to the negotiating table. Worst of all, Karuna’s rebellion was double-crossed and Prabhakaran’s Sea Tigers allowed to violate the CFA and land in his rear area; General Sarath Fonseka was transferred from Jaffna and placed on the shelf in charge of the Volunteers ( the Sunday Island carried many pieces by me around the time and after, vigorously criticizing the decision and arguing for his placement at the helm of our army); and the tsunami weakened Tigers were sought to be given an administrative–financial authority in the form of the PTOMS, probably as part of a deal with the TNA which would give a third term to the incumbent.

These are not the only critics of the Rajapakse administration and the postwar outcome. Others include the local and foreign NGOs comprising self–proclaimed civil society; the Churches; and the non-Tiger Tamil dissidents such the UTHR and SLDF. Had Colombo’s cosmopolitan civil society not been so totally pro-appeasement, had the churches been visibly and audibly critical of Tiger totalitarianism and exercised greater internal discipline (instead of allowing some of its clergymen to opt for Barabbas, as Fr Bernard continues to do from Mindanao), had the Tamil dissidents worked for a united front of anti-Tiger Tamils which could have launched a resistance struggle in the rear of the LTTE or backed Karuna and Douglas Devananda, who were the actually existing alternatives to the Tigers, their criticisms - pious, petulant or patronizing - of trends in postwar Sri Lanka would not have so little social legitimacy and traction. (I recall the response of an award winning Indian journalist of Tamil ethnicity who wrote a book on the war, when I praised the UTHR-J reports: "yeah, except for that Church of South India tone of preachy Protestant moralizing!")

None of this justifies any attempt by extremist lobbies to translate and degrade the victory of the Sri Lankan state, its armed forces and the people over the Tigers, a valiant victory which has the potential to be a liberation of all the peoples of the island from LTTE fascism, into an armed version, a militarized equivalent of 1956 or 1972 (the abolition of Section 29 and the formal enthronement of one language, religion and specific state form over others).Whatever their socially enabling and democratic aspects for the vast majority, both 1956 and 1972 contained for the minorities, a dimension of discrimination, domination and divisiveness.

No current critique, however trenchant, of postwar Sri Lankan trends approximates in its luminous perspicacity the following judgment:

"Separate identities have been sustained and fortified by deep antagonisms and wildly contested facts which extend over two millenia and more…Each fresh confrontation and every violent eruption becomes an instant invitation to an overpowering onrush of self-righteous recidivism, against which reason can only erect the feeblest defenses... Having co-opted the clergy, can militant Sinhalese-Buddhism rely on support from the armed services, too?... Now regional councils are coming up for air for the third (and last?) time. All the political parties are discussing the proposal, a shrewd… move to gain endorsement from a national consensus. But has political power already slipped out of the hands of politicians?"

Amazingly, these words appeared a shade over a quarter century ago in the pages of the Far Eastern Economic Review of January 26, 1984, pp22-23, and were written by Mervyn de Silva. Though a little late, I have wised-up sufficiently, not to doubt my father’s wisdom, but was this a description of some aspect of the reality at the time, or a latent tendency at any time given Sri Lankan society, history and mentality, or an early warning-cum-prediction? Only future history will tell.

Top of Form Bottom of Form

Does this mean that from a pluralist, reformist or modernist perspective all is lost either by cultural fore-ordination and teleology or by default and abdication? I would argue not necessarily, not inevitably, for three reasons, all discernible from a dialectical standpoint. These are the three potential sources of pluralist reform in postwar Sri Lanka. In ascending order of significance, the first is comprised of the Tamil allies and partners of the state and the governing party. Contrary to the crude, congruent distortions of Colombo’s liberals and their western patrons as well as the Sinhala hardliners, it is not the case that the anti-Tiger camp is monolithically and exclusively Sinhala hard-line while those who are for ethnic equality and autonomy belong to the "antiwar", "anti-state" and "antigovernment" camp. There is a strategically significant anti-Tiger, pro-state, pro-Govt Tamil stakeholder segment, which stands for equality and devolution.

The second driver of a more pluralist postwar outcome is the democratic system which includes the courts and above all, competitive elections. Municipal elections are imminent, Parliamentary elections are scheduled for the first half of next year and Northern provincial elections are unavoidably on the agenda. With proportional representation, the Tamil people will punch pretty much their demographic weight. Political space cannot but broaden, and the ensuing give-and-take is inevitable, eroding ideological blocs. Post-election, the postwar power bloc would be recomposed.

The third and final source is the external factor. Forget the unfair critics of Sri Lanka and those who tilt to the pro-Tiger Tamil Diaspora for one reason or the other. Those who stood by Sri Lanka during the war and its aftermath are crucially interested in political accommodation of the Tamil minority – with India being an obvious case in point, but by no means the only one holding this view. The statement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization led by China and Russia, which has admitted Sri Lanka as a "dialogue partner" (my regular readers, going back to the Weekend Express column may recognize that I canvassed for affiliation since its founding almost a decade ago), mentions not only "independence and sovereignty" but also "the rights of minorities".

It is the dynamic of interaction of these three factors within the anti-Tiger, "patriotic" universe, within the cosmos of the Sri Lankan state, within the power-bloc that won the war, which will make for pluralism, reform and possibly paradigm shift.

We shall need to pay heed to the views of our friends, local and foreign, as it becomes increasingly obvious that the Tiger army is destroyed but the Tiger movement or global network is still alive, a well-placed new generation of Tamil secessionists have been born overseas and have come of age, and though the war is decisively won, the protracted struggle with Tamil Tiger separatism on a world scale is hardly over. A long Cold War has just begun.

(These are the strictly personal views of the writer).

Courtesy: Island.lk

Last Updated ( Saturday, 27 June 2009 )

Belly Dance & Cultural Taboos

Belly dance is a social dance that heals body, souls and minds. War torn Sri Lanka needs a social comfort & economic development. After defeat of terrorism of 30 years Sri Lanka is facing challenges of stengthning ethnic harmony, eradication of discrimination (on gender, class, sexuality, power), corruption and taboos. Dark clouds and stormy days have passed-by, the silver lining yet to come above Sri Lanka. Since Mahinda Rajapakse came to power, Sri Lanka is heading right direction victoriously with minor short comings which exaggerated by west, especially last two months on war, UNHRC, world politics, economy, lives of Sri Lankans. We should not forget the areas we can improve on human rights concerns, human rights, discrimination on ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, abuses, intimidations etc.

Sri Lanka needs re-organization of civil administration system with zero tolerance to corruption and strengthening of legal system. There should not be any room for double standards, hypocrisies, taboos, and politicization. A true freedom to all people in all aspects including freedom of speech and discrimination free society (beliefs, ethnicity, religion, gender, class, sexual identity).

Sri Lanka needs a change in traditional thinking. Globalization is standing at the door step of Sri Lanka, discussions and debates on socio-cultural issues necessary than ever to stimulate peace & development of Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka needs development of infrastructures, cities, re-organization of inefficient civil institutes that have negative impact on development. Roads, transport, communication, and digital communitation, computer literacy which can contribute rocket speed development are needed to be modernized with help from Asian giants like Russia, China, Japan and India if necessary. Dealing with India and Europe must be cautious. We should not be disconnected from west Europe but be vigilant and absorb them.

Sri Lanka legal system has to be broad minded, ensuring cultural harmony, respecting different political and religion views. The age of consent in Sri Lanka is 18 year or above, but a man and woman above 18yrs cant check-in to a hotel room unless they have a marriage certificate. A boy and a girl above 18 cant have sex before marriage and individual's feelings controlled by government. Some release sexual tensions in either public transport or in an abandoned street or a temple as a result of sexual oppression. Youths have to explore sex secretly. If they found staying in hotels, they will be arrested and treated as criminals. A survey conducted by the Health Ministry placed the average age of sexual debut for males at 15.3 for males and for females at 14.4 (in Sri Lanka) while France have an average age of 17.5 and 17.2 for men and women respectively. Better results could be achieved by proper sex education. One can argue our culture doesnt permit sexual acts, but youths curiosity have enormous threatened the society.

Our needs have changed along with civilization, digitalization and time has come to have discussions and debates on current issues such as taboos, social issues and human rights with all concerned parties in a constructive way. Sri Lanka and its people cannot be isolated from rest of the world with regard to life styles, democracy and development. Sri Lanka should be a model of democracy and freedom, the cream of buddhism.

Ayurvedic health centres can be promoted and should be used to heal and rejuvenate people which are often raided by police. Why should we think adult entertainment should be banned? Why not having that at least for people who have imbalanced hormones so rest can live in harmony (rather than oppresed by religion). I am not suggesting an immitaion of west but when you see life-styles of people, they are oppressed from taboos. Massage parlours, casinos, Karaoke bars are money springs for corrupted police officers. The entertainment industry have stood still for the last 30 years.

Government must implement a national health monitoring system to ensure prevention of spread of sexually transmitted diseases, unexpected pregnancy for risk groups and bring them under control not by corrupted police officers who raid hotels and other places but by medical officers and health clinics implemented island wide. There must be sexual awareness programmes through media and schools, so people can be prevented from falling to danger.

People are sent to jail often just because smoking a cigarette or visiting a club. But serial murderers and criminals are free on the streets. They are arrested (some cases have evidences) but are bailled out and continue threatening society. Those are the things that have to be tackeled; making sure cities are safe, vilages are safe, streets are safe, homes are safe for people. We need crime free society in Sri Lanka. We have battered for 30 years from war. Now time for people to enjoy life, while education and development continue. Smoking is banned in public but no smoking zones provided in public areas, deliberate violation of rights of smokers.

Tourism industry can contribute rapid development of Sri Lanka enormously than any other industry. Tourism in Sri Lanka must be given as a priority, and need huge investments for development of accessess to main cities and meet the expectations of tourists who come to Sri Lanka. Most come for sun, beach and cultural interests. Our beaches should be clean, free of criminal beach boys and disturbing vendors, possibly provided with identities. Safety of tourists and Sri Lankans has to be strengthened by police. Police should be tourist friendly. More tourist attractions, entertainment, such as nude beaches (a trend for nature loving people should not be mistaken with sexbeaches), theme parks, shopping malls, cultural events, site scenes, tours, travel agents, national and internal cuisines, clean entertaining clubs & pubs, spas with traditional and international standards should be available. So, more tourists will be attracted. Culture should not be collided with tourism but should give an added value to tourism.

Entertainments such as Belly dancing consider as an adult entertainment in Sri Lanka, but it is socializing event in middle-eastern cultures and western cultures. Costume of Belly dance make it a seductive or social dance performed either by women or men which is characterized by hip swaying and contracting of the stomach muscles. People are forced to look away the beauty of the world. A beauty for one peson can be disgusting for another. But what we need to realize is life has lot to offer, explore and enjoy rather than doing samething from one generation to another. We need a change, a change just like Mahinda Rajapakse and Barack Obama have already shown.