TAMIL GENOCIDE RESOLUTION OF NPC
The Northern Provincial Council (NPC) passed a resolution on 10 February urging the United Nations to probe alleged genocide of Tamils committed by all successive governments of Sri Lanka in the post-independence history. It was presented by the Chief Minister (CM) Wigneswaran, himself. Two days later, the CM visited President Sirisena with the Governor of the Province. According to the media, the CM had explained the circumstances under which the resolution was passed and the President in turn had said that he understood the political compulsions faced by different political parties.
Ceylontoday, 2015-02-22 02:00:00
Read 494 Times
TAMIL GENOCIDE RESOLUTION OF NPC
By Udaya P. Gammanpila
The Northern Provincial Council (NPC) passed a resolution on 10 February urging the United Nations to probe alleged genocide of Tamils committed by all successive governments of Sri Lanka in the post-independence history. It was presented by the Chief Minister (CM) Wigneswaran, himself. Two days later, the CM visited President Sirisena with the Governor of the Province. According to the media, the CM had explained the circumstances under which the resolution was passed and the President in turn had said that he understood the political compulsions faced by different political parties.
If this report is true, President Sirisena must be in ignorance due to lack of proper advice. Firstly, the resolution is not only against the Rajapaksa administration but against all governments in the post-independence history. Further, there is a special reference in the resolution to President Sirisena. The resolution doubts President Sirisena holding a genuine local investigation as he was the acting Defence Minister during the last phase of the war and the then Army Commander General Fonseka was the coalition partner of the President. Comparison between the contents of the resolution and the message conveyed to the President by the CM clearly reflects his duplicity. Hence, without being fooled by sugary words of the CM, let us analyze the intention of the TNA.
Genocide Convention
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) was adopted by the United Nations in 1948. According to the Convention, Genocide means commitment of certain acts with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. The objective of the convention was to prevent repetition of incidents similar to genocide of Jews by Hitler's Nazi Germany.
Although the Convention was adopted in 1948, the first enforcement took place in 1998 by convicting a mayor in Rwanda, Jean Paul Akayesu. Two weeks later, Jean Kambanda, a former Prime Minister of Rwanda became the first Head of Government to be convicted under the Convention. Has Sri Lanka violated the Convention?
All successive governments in Sri Lanka have worked towards protecting and fostering the Tamil community instead of attempting genocide. Sri Lanka adopted a Citizenship Act in 1949 which is quite similar to Citizenship Acts passed by former colonies of the British Empire. Accordingly, more than one million Indians who failed to prove their residence in Sri Lanka for a continuous period of more than five years were scheduled to go back to India. When they refused to leave the country, the Sri Lankan Governments from time to time granted citizenship to the majority of them. A government engaged in genocide would not grant citizenships to foreign citizens of their victim community.
Army stopped using
artillery guns
Sri Lankan army stopped using artillery guns in the war against the LTTE as the LTTE had used nearly 400,000 civilians as a human shield. More than 3,000 war heroes had to sacrifice their life because of this decision. More than 10,000 war heroes got injured. Accordingly, our Army had sacrificed their lives to secure the safety of Tamils instead of genocide.
Nearly 12,000 terrorists surrendered at the last phase of the war. If Sri Lankan forces were in an attempt to inflict genocide on Tamils, they would have committed suicide instead of surrender because they would be subject to inhuman torture before murder by an Army engaged in genocide. They surrendered to the Army having faith in the government. Confirming the faith reposed in the government, it provided vocational training to the surrendered terrorists, after rehabilitation. In the end, they were handed over to their kith and kin with gifts.
Successive Sri Lankan Governments continuously supplied essentials such as food and medicine to the LTTE held areas. It never imposed an economic embargo despite the fact that majority of supplies would end up with terrorists, because the government was concerned of the welfare of Tamils under terrorist control.
The above explanations clearly establish that post-independence Sri Lankan Governments were not in an attempt to commit genocide on Tamils. In this backdrop, it is pertinent to find out the ulterior motive of the resolution brought by the CM. The resolution attempts to portray that Sri Lankan Tamils are in the same plight as of Jews under the Nazi regime. Further, it attempts to show the world that all national leaders of post-independence Sri Lanka are blood thirsty warmongers like Adolf Hitler.
Government, protector
of its citizens
The government is the protector of its citizens. If the protector itself turns to be the killer, the victim has no protection whatsoever. Hence, if a government is committing genocide on a community, the Tamils have a moral right to establish their own government in the territory where they are the majority. This condition was the rationale for establishing Israel for Jews. Secondly, when the government kills its own people, there will be nobody to protect them. Hence, it is a strong ground for the international community to intervene in the issue. In 1993, NATO forces got involved in the Bosnian war because the international community realized that the government did not protect its own Muslim population.
In the light of above, if Tamils in Sri Lanka are subject to genocide, they have the moral right to establish a Tamil Eelam in the North and the East with the support of the international community. Hence, the ulterior motive of the resolution is to create an atmosphere which warrants an international direct intervention in Sri Lanka to establish Tamil Eelam. New nations such as Pakistan, Israel, East Timor and South Sudan were added to the international community not because of military victories but because of international interventions.
Unfortunately, nobody had educated the President of this disastrous ulterior motive of the resolution. It seems that no advisor has the capacity to explain to the President the legal and political impact of the resolution. If there were such advisors, the President would not have used words "political compulsions" in his dialogue with the CM. Hence, patriots are duty bound to tell the nation that our motherland is in danger again.
A similar resolution last October
Provincial Councillor, Shivajilingam, brought a similar resolution to the NPC last October. The CM persuaded him to withdraw it explaining that they could not maintain any relationship with Sri Lankan Government after adopting such a resolution.
If your best friend levels an allegation that you raped his wife, can you maintain the friendship thereafter? That is why the CM persuaded Shivajilingam to withdraw the resolution.
The very same CM decided to submit the resolution this time. This reflects the new born courage of Tamil separatists. They are now confident that the present regime would tolerate their separatist actions despite how destructive those are. We warned, during the presidential election campaign, that Tamil separatism would be strengthened if Sirisena secured victory.
The JHU leaders then spent millions of Rupees on advertisements to tell the nation, such things would not take place as they were also with Sirisena's team. As I repeatedly pointed out in my articles, Tamil separatism marches forward at an unprecedented pace. Unfortunately, the JHU has become a silent onlooker despite their promises during the election. Sometimes it barks without any success merely to mark its presence.
No comments:
Post a Comment