*UNHRC Vote in Geneva though a moral victory for Sri Lanka time to shun
gutless (bayagulla) diplomacy *

*Sri Lanka can claim a moral victory on the basis that 2014 UNHRC
Resolution was adopted against Sri Lanka with 23 votes while a majority
comprising 24 nations did not support the Resolution by either voting
against or abstaining with India joining the list of abstentions. This is a
striking difference from the pattern of voting shown on the last two
occasions at UNHRC in 2012 and 2013 when Sri Lanka's Human Rights record
was reviewed. India's decision not to support the Resolution despite a
raucous Tamilnadu threatening to break away from India is a clear
indication of a significant turnaround in foreign policy making in India
with the Centre asserting dominance over Regional priorities. India's
withdrawal of support reduces the Resolution adopted at Geneva to nothing
more than a *Pyrrhic or hollow victory. The pattern of voting also revealed
another significant development - the emerging cleavage in the community of
nations with the Western Christian countries (with a few exceptions) being
placed on one side and driven to isolation while the populous Third World
nations drawn from Asia, Africa and Latin America closing ranks. This is a
foretaste of the new world order that is dawning with the Asian giants at
the helm.

*The 2014 UNHRC voting nations & the results:*

*Those who voted for the resolution:*

Argentina, Austria, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cote
D'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Mexico,
Montenegro, Peru, Rep. of Korea, Romania, Sierra Leon, The Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, UK, USA.

*Those who voted against:*

Algeria, China, Congo, Cuba, Kenya, Maldives, Pakistan, Russian Federation,
Saudi Arabia, UAE, Venezuela, Vietnam

*Those who abstained:*

Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Gabon, India, Indonesia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait,
Morocco, Namibia, Philippines, South Africa.

The people of Sri Lankan bow their heads to the nations that bravely voted
against the Resolution and backed their decision with very powerful
speeches that revealed that they had a sound understanding of the ground
situation including the under currents. In taking the populations of the
nations voting in favor of the Resolution vis a vis the nations that voted
against and abstained reveal that the total population of the 23 nations
can hardly match the combined populations of the 24 nations. In other
words, Sri Lanka has the support of the majority of the people of the
world.

Special mention must be made of China, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela, Maldives,
Vietnam, Kenya, Congo, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and in particular the
magnanimous gesture of Pakistan whose chief delegate virtually stole the
show with an eloquent presentation and analysis of the diabolical motives
of the sponsors of the Resolution under the cover of protecting Human
Rights in Sri Lanka. He said that the whole exercise was nothing but
political. He argued that there was no available funding within the UNHRC
Annual Budget for this proposed investigation and added that if the lack of
funds were to be overcome with funds granted by the sponsors of the
Resolution then the whole process will get tainted. In the light of lack of
funds the Pakistan delegate proposed a No Action motion to defer the
discussion of the Resolution to a later date when the availability of funds
is certain.

He also proposed an amendment to the Resolution with the removal of the
clause calling for a separate investigation on alleged HR violations in Sri
Lanka to be conducted by the Office of the High Commissioner of UNHRC.  Though
both his proposals were defeated by a carefully cultivated block of nations
that has virtually hijacked the UNHRC and converted it into an Inquisition,
the gutsy performance of Pakistan's chief delegate did not fail to win the
admiration of an international audience that watched the proceedings on TV.
He also provided a valuable lesson to several other delegations from
various countries including Sri Lanka grappling with the task of choosing
the right candidates to represent their nations in international fora and
bring credit to their nations through brilliant individual performances at
international conferences and sessions.

Sri Lankans are also grateful to the nations that abstained from voting for
it symbolized their inclination not to vote with the US and the lies that
had been built up against the country. In what was obviously a huge
surprise to the entire UNHRC was India's decision to abstain from voting.
It was clearly a slap in the face to the eelam lobbyists, the LTTE diaspora
and Tamilnadu while also showing that the care-taker Government of India
though still nominally under the control of the Congress Party was no
longer in control of India's decision making on Foreign policy and with the
likely Modi victory the South-bloc had ensured that India's self-interest
was re- established overriding parochial agendas promoted by regional
entities.

*Depart from 'bayagulla' Diplomacy *

Unbeknown to the decision makers the patriotic forces both in Sri Lanka and
overseas took it upon themselves to lobby support for Sri Lanka and counter
the lies and false propaganda that was being built up against Sri Lanka
whilst officials in charge of countering foreign diplomatic onslaughts
preferred to adopt the age-old policy that has been a proven failure. That,
gutless (bayagulla) diplomacy championed by Oxbridge speakers functioning
as brown sahibs has not worked underlies the key message that being the
nice-guy in today's international scene was unlikely to reap dividends in
the face of diabolical conduct by nations forging their geopolitical
agenda. Timidity, moral cowardice, lack of spine and vision which has been
the hall mark of Sri Lanka's foreign policy and diplomacy in the last few
years and particularly after the departure of Mr. Lakshman Kadrigamar from
the foreign affairs scene needs to be radically overhauled.

What Sri Lanka's delegations should have included were the real victims to
counter the lies


   - representatives of the Sinhalese killed - family of children killed by
   LTTE, Buddhist monks killed by LTTE, the injured at various public places
   throughout Sri Lanka, the injured from suicide bombs and a representative
   of the 4198 missing soldiers about whom Navi Pillai has said nothing
   - representatives of the Muslims killed - the children killed in
   mosques, the villagers
   - representatives of the Tamils killed by the LTTE - nullifying the
   established notion that Tamils are all for the LTTE. It is evident that the
   Tamils now coming forward to present their cases for the missing and
   disappeared commission shows how Tamils are now not afraid to come out
   against the LTTE. To this list should have been the key protagonist in the
   Last Phase documentary, the former LTTEr shot at by the LTTE and now
   defaced. Her testimony would have nullified the lies being promoted. To
   this list should have also been Arun Thambimuttu whose parents were both
   slain by the LTTE, to this list should have been the child soldiers
   rehabilitated and now in employment or continuing studies.

What was clearly lacking in the country's strategy was a plan to win the
votes in Sri Lanka's favor using arguments that would tap into the
self-interests of these nations which is what forced India's decision. That
the UNHRC head was biased with an irrefutable conflict of interest was
projected half-heartedly, that the discrepancies in the UNHRC's treatment
of Sri Lanka was not highlighted internationally, that Sri Lanka did not
align with topics that would have inspired the nationalist and patriotic
groups in nations of Africa, Latin America and Asia to bond with Sri Lanka
was also sidelined - colonial crimes would have been an easy topic to have
silenced nations of Europe and UK and place them on the back foot. That is
how the Jews and Israel do by drawing international attention to the
horrors of the Holocaust. We have suffered enough and more during the
colonial era of the Portuguese, Dutch and British and much of our ethnic
and religious conflicts stem from the seeds of conflict planted on Sri
Lanka's soil by European colonial Governments. This is a common story all
over the Third World and a viable basis to bond with others on a shared
past of colonial oppression, plunder of resources and suppression of
indigenous religions.

With Britain all out to destroy the unity and territorial integrity of Sri
Lanka under the cloak of Human Rights, we find that the Ministry of
External Affairs unashamedly has commended Britain for its colonial legacy
in Sri Lanka on its website stating that merits of British imperial rule
outweighed the demerits. It is this type of servility and subservience on
the part of the decision makers in this Ministry that prevents Sri Lanka
from bonding with Afro - Asian nations and even the Buddhist nations of
Asia and giving leadership and moral direction as in the days of S.W.R.D.
Bandaranaike and Sirima Bandaranaike.

People who take no pride in the country's literary and cultural heritage,
and have nothing but contempt for the country's national heroes
particularly those who defended Sri Lanka from foreign conquests should
have no place in the Ministry of External Affairs. By placing an excessive
emphasis on English language skills to the exclusion of all other relevant
factors we find a Foreign Ministry lacking an Architecture in foreign
policy making, vision and floating rudderless in the international arena.
There has to be a constant engagement with the patriotic segments of this
country and their input must be taken into account in shaping foreign
policy. The last thing that the country needs is a Ministry converted into
a one man show for self serving purposes nor policies that change just
because a nation abstained from voting.

Sri Lanka needs to align with true friends and strategic stakes should not
be given to nations that votes according to self-interest only therefore
areas like Sampoor, Trincomalee, national assets need to be leased to
countries that have solidly stood by Sri Lanka and detrimental agreements
that the public continues to request to be repealed should now be taken up
for review. This is not a time to be playing politics with these areas in
the best interest of the leaders themselves for it is they who end up being
taken to international courts and not the public - let the politicians
remember that.

*Establish Commission of inquiry to cover period 1972 - 2009     *

Even at this late stage the Government of Sri Lanka can exercise its
sovereign rights and parallel to the intrusive inquiry that the UNHRC High
Commissioner plans to undertake covering the period 2002 - 2009, the
Government can establish a Commission of Inquiry to cover the period from
1972 - 2009. No one can challenge the rationale of such a move.

The Government must take on the LTTE Diaspora and have a strategized plan
to counter the lies, ban LTTE fronts and properly market the post-conflict
developments while setting the story straight. Ethno-political parties must
not be allowed to dictate the decisions the Government takes on behalf of
the entire country as such we will not tolerate the Government's silence
when TNA or others claim the North as Tamil Homeland. Sinhalese and Muslims
have every right to live in the North and the Government must categorically
place this fact before the TNA and international community without playing
politics with the issue.

Instead of waiting for things to happen let us make things happen. That
should be the motto of both the Government and in particular the Ministry
of External Affairs. We must stop cringing before nations or foreign
leaders.

In addition the Government of Sri Lanka must challenge the suitability of
Ms. Navi Pillay to conduct this inquiry given her blatant bias and conflict
of interest which are in gross violation of well known equitable principles
and natural justice.

We must bring a motion against her at the UNHRC even if it means that Sri
Lanka has to walk away from the UNHRC in protest at the biased and
vindictive stand taken by her. We must be prepared to canvass the points
regarding her unsuitability that are now in the public domain. They are
well argued and well researched and legally sound and tenable. The failure
to raise these points is tantamount to a gross dereliction of duty and an
inexcusable default.

The fatal attractions of brown sahibs and unwinnable war proponents must
not be allowed to marginalize alternate points of view generated by
patriots in the best interests of Sri Lanka.


*Shenali D. Waduge *

-- 
තෙරුවන් සරණයි !
--
If You Unable to read SINHALA,
http://www.siyabas.lk/sinhala_how_to_install.html
==================================
E-MailSriLanka E-Mail Group
==================================
http://groups.google.com/group/emailsrilanka

මෙම පණිවිඩය ඔබට ලැබෙන්නේ ඔබගේ ඊමේල් ලිපිනය 
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා හි සාමාජිකත්වය ලබා ඇති නිසාය.

ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා සමුහයෙන් ඉවත් වීම සදහා.
To UNSUBSCRIBE from this E-Mail Group, 
send email to : 
[email protected]
==================================
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා සමූහයට ඇතුලත් වීම සදහා.
To SUBSCRIBE to this E-Mail Group, 

[email protected]

OR Go to,
http://groups.google.lk/group/emailsrilanka/boxsubscribe
=================================
For Invite Members
ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා වෙත ඹබගේ යහලුවන්ගේ ඊමේල් ලිපින හදුන්වාදීම සදහා
http://groups.google.com/group/emailsrilanka/members_invite
............................
බුදු සසුන බැබලේවා !

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ඊමේල් ශ්‍රීලංකා" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to