SRI LANKA the harassed nation

450 YEARS TORTURE -No other country in Asia have suffered as Sri Lanka. Sinhala Children had grown up nurtured BY ALIENS . Making our own children discarding our heritage .. It was Ven Mahinda who brought Buddhism to Sri lanka 246 BC that made Sri Lanka Innocently civilized following noble five precepts.Now we have another Mahinda..Mahindas fearless manners of saving our heads the innocent majority is now under. Alien hammer.UNCLE SAM DANENA THIS IF HE SEE EVARAI

Monday, April 28, 2014

pls sing petition to Obama-save lanka from Arab Spring like devastation they said for the people you and your friend can give a hand to tell obama do not

pls sing petition to Obama-save lank from Arab Spring like devastation they said for the people

you and your friend can give a hand to tell obama do not

harrass-pls

this the URL http://wh.gov/lf0aT LOG IN SIGN fro OBAMA to take notice

coordinated by damaru sri lanka chapter

Sunday, April 27, 2014

save lanka - sign petiton to Obama Father of all

how to sing

1-go-- https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions

2--log in

3- sign in favour

save lanka

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions

LTTE rump in Britain push for trade embargo against Sri Lanka April 19, 2014, 12:00 pm

LTTE rump in Britain push for trade embargo against Sri Lanka

April 19, 2014, 12:00 pm

By Sujeeva Nivunhella in London
In their latest bid, pro-LTTE Tamil groups are preparing the ground work to urge Britain to halt trading with Sri Lanka with the objective of dealing an economic blow to the country.

The Sunday Island reliably learns that these activists are planning to unleash a campaign called "Say No To Sri Lanka".

These groups are already in consultation with the top British politicians to stop buying any commodities from Sri Lanka citing the human rights record in the country as an excuse, knowledgeable sources said.

UK is Sri Lanka’s second biggest export market after USA. Sri Lanka exports tea, apparel, fish, bicycles, rubber, gems and Jewellery, coir products, ceramics, fruits & vegetables and toys to Britain.

The next British general election is due in 2015 and the LTTE rump has already rallied around many British politicians from all political parties. Substantial donations are offered and in marginal seats, MPs have been told that the Tamil vote is the deciding factor, they asserted.

"Under these circumstances, I wouldn’t be surprised if a trade embargo is enforced on Sri Lanka", said Douglas Wickramaratne, President of the Sinhala Association in the United Kingdom.

"Unlike in the past, High Commission officials in London do not engage the Sri Lankan community to play their part for the betterment of Sri Lanka and, has as a result, allowed pro-LTTE Tamils to take the upper hand", he said.

"We have failed to highlight the fact that Sri Lankans — Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and all others opposed to terrorism in the UK far outnumber the pro-LTTE Tamils, who have managed to convince the British politicians. It is evident that there is a lot of pressure from the British government on Sri Lanka for the first time in history", Wickramaratne noted.

"One can see that during the past two-year period, we have lost almost all the support we had from British parliamentarians. For some reason, the vigorous lobbying campaign we had earlier is almost non-existent now", he noted.

The Sri Lankan government should implement a lobbying mechanism involving Sri Lankan activists before the situation gets any worse, he warned. "During the last elections to elect the London Mayor, we launched a campaign asking all peace-loving Sri Lankans to vote against Ken Livingstone, who openly supported the LTTE cause, and defeated him", Wickramaratne recalled.

Market sources said that if a trade embargo is enforced on Sri Lanka, the worst hit fields would be tea exports and apparel exports. "Tesco", a supermarket giant in the UK, recently started importing goods from small industries in Sri Lanka, thanks to the hard work of Trade Commissioner in London, Mrs. Sonali Wijeratne.

This will also be hit in case the UK stops trade with Sri Lanka, they warned

LTTE rump in Britain push for trade embargo against Sri Lanka

April 19, 2014, 12:00 pm

The Sunday Island reliably learns that these activists are planning to unleash a campaign called "Say No To Sri Lanka".

"Under these circumstances, I wouldn’t be surprised if a trade embargo is enforced on Sri Lanka", said Douglas Wickramaratne, President of the Sinhala Association in the United Kingdom.

This will also be hit in case the UK stops trade with Sri Lanka, they warned

US Supreme Court creates million-$ loopholes!

Campaign-Contributions: No limits for the ‘One’ Percent.....

April 19, 2014, 4:14 pm

article_image

"It says here that you gave a lot of money to both parties and neither expected nor received anything in return. Very nice, but we’ll have to put you in the "crazy’ section".

by Selvam Canagaratna

"What he [the Chief Justice] is saying here is that a giant barrel of money given to a candidate doesn’t, in and of itself, represent ‘buying’ that
candidate."

– Chez Pazienza, The Daily Banter (April 2, 2014)

Small wonder Pazienza’s piece, written hot on the heels of the Court’s 5-4 majority ruling in McCutcheon v. FEC, was headlind ‘The Supreme Court Just Screwed Us All’ – which the publication also hailed as the ‘Quote of the Day’.

In writing the majority opinion that struck down existing overall limits on individual campaign contributions, US Chief Justice John Roberts noted: "Spending large sums of money in connection with elections, but not in connection with an effort to control the exercise of an officeholder’s official duties, does not give rise to such quid pro quo corruption. Nor does the possibility that an individual who spends large sums may garner ‘influence over or access to’ elected officials or political parties."

Commented Pazienza: "The naïveté on display – either from Roberts himself or in what he expects from us, the docile masses – truly is staggering." The self-supporting ‘theory’ the Chief Justice propounded, but this time with the force of law, remember, is that unless a campaign donation came with explicitly stated ‘expectations’ from a donor, it was not a form of corruption.

"This of course completely ignores the reality that a plutocrat drowning his favourite candidates in cash to get them elected makes it entirely unnecessary to have to enter into a verbal or written agreement with those candidates in exchange for all that largesse. The quid pro quo is implied – and that’s what makes the whole deal so f***ing insidious."

The Supreme Court’s latest decision further eroded America’s practically non-existent campaign finance laws, making it even easier for the super-wealthy to purchase political and legislative authority the same way they’d purchase a new mansion or another yacht, wrote Pazienza. "The Court has decided that money is a form of speech, that it truly does ‘talk’, and that it should be afforded all the Constitutional protection you or I do in voicing our (increasingly worthless) opinions on who should lead our country and ostensibly represent us. We still have a say, but with McCutcheon and Citizens United before that, those with outrageous amounts of money now have a much larger say, and if you think those people will be funneling funds toward candidates who want to work for us, the tragic assholes in Steerage Class, you’re out of your mind."

If there was any kind of balance between the wealthy and the poor in this country, or even a robust and expansive middle-class to speak of any more, today’s sharply divided partisan decision by the high court would still be a devastating blow to a good 97% of America, wrote Pazienza. "Considering the state we’re already in when it comes to income and wealth inequality, though, the blow is just about fatal. When money can buy elections with legal sanction from the highest court in the land, nobody’s going to be looking out for you and me because our wants and needs simply don’t matter and we don’t have the cash to pay to get them anyway.

"If America wasn’t officially a plutocracy before, it damn sure is now," concluded Pazienza.

The most perceptive reader-response to Pazienza’s piece was: "Reading about the fall of past empires has always entertained me, but watching my nation fall apart is heartbreaking."

Jeffrey Toobin writing in The New Yorker was perturbed by what, in his view, the McCutcheon ruling foreshadowed. "If you think the Supreme Court decision was bad, just wait: worse may be on the way."

Toobin interpreted the Chief Justice’s opinion as being indicative "that the Court remains committed to the project announced most prominently in the Citizens United case, four years ago: the deregulation of American political campaigns."

"The court, and Roberts in particular, has been very clear that regulation of campaign contributions is allowed under a single rationale. As he wrote in McCutcheon, "It is not an acceptable governmental objective to ‘level the playing field’, or to ‘level electoral opportunities’, or to ‘equalize the financial resources of candidates’. Rather, Roberts wrote, "Congress may target only a specific type of corruption – ‘quid pro quo’ corruption."

But what is ‘quid pro quo’ corruption [CJ’s version] and what can Congress do about it? In Toobin’s view, Roberts was clearer about what ‘quid pro quo’ corruption was not than about what it was.

Added Toobin: "In other words, Roberts is defining ‘quid pro quo’ corruption almost as outright bribery, which Congress can outlaw. But the implication of what Roberts is saying is that anything short of outright bribery is protected by the First Amendment!

"Roberts is dismissive of the objections to deregulating campaigns and full of sympathy for the plight of those denied the ability to contribute as much money as they would prefer. He writes that under the current law, ‘A donor must limit the number of candidates he supports, and may have to choose which of several policy concerns he will advance – clear First Amendment harms’, adding that ‘the whole point of the First Amendment is to afford individuals protection against such infringements.’ Adds Toobin: "In an almost Orwellian recasting, Roberts calls giving money ‘participating in an electoral debate’!"

"Every Chief Justice takes on a project," concluded Toobin. "Earl Warren wanted to desegregate the South. Warren Burger wanted to limit the rights of criminal suspects. William Rehnquist wanted to revive the powers of the states. It increasingly appears likely that, for John Roberts, the project will be removing the limits that burden wealthy campaign contributors – the ‘whole point’ of the First Amendment, as he sees it. So far, that project is doing pretty well."

Rob Hager, a public interest litigator writing in CounterPunch magazine, recalled Roberts’ performance in 2006: "Instead of the ‘umpire with no agenda’ that he disingenuously promised the Senate when his nomination was under consideration, CJ Roberts has given us the opposite. Then he said: ‘Umpires don’t make the rules, they apply them’. A former schoolmate of Roberts described him in a way that applies to his pretense of not inventing new rules: ‘He could take an argument that was borderline absurd and argue for it so well that you were almost at the point of having to accept his stance even though it was intuitively obvious that it was absurd’. And he has now committed serial acts of ‘treason to the constitution’ by usurping legislative power in the service of plutocracy." [Worth remembering Roberts was appointed by the very President whose re-election he helped to steal!]

"Roberts misses the irony in his statement that ‘those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern’," wrote Hager. "He thinks he is aiming that platitude at Congress under the pretense that Congress governs. But Congress does not govern under the Supreme Court’s judicial supremacy ideology. The Court now governs, and Congress is paid by plutocrats to leave the Court in charge of corrupting its elections. The Court has proven once again that, as the Constitution itself provides, it should have no role whatsoever in inventing new election law contrary to that which the people themselves desire."

Justice Breyer, dissenting, said the ruling created "a loophole measured in the millions."

Gene Nichol, Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of North Carolina, described Roberts’ ‘grotesque hypocrisy’ thus: "Never has there been so wide a chasm between the jurist calculatingly advertised and the one subsequently, knowingly, delivered."

british took all we had still taking

NOT EGREGIOUS, BY EXAMPLE

Pie throwing at British MPs is a fairly common pastime and so are the routines that have to do with rotten tomatoes for instance. There was the well known case of one gentleman who punched a custard pie thrower and was never contrite but did not get any reprimand, as the man (the thrower not the target) was deemed to have got his just desserts.

The recent egg throwing incident in the proximity of the Mattala airport does sound a little bit overblown in the above context.

Collective, or even mass frustration causes the custard pie throwing incidents in the UK, and have now been taken to be part of the political culture, almost, in that country, which is why there has been no major arrests that concern pie throwing or rotten tomato hurling in those parts of Europe...

Particularly in Britain this sort of thing has been treated as par for the course in voicing opposition towards elected representatives, and at the most, it could be said, such things are treated as occupational hazards.

A little bit of egg on the face of UNP MPs therefore does not seem to do any harm that cannot be remedied on the long run with a good dry clean job, and some men’s deodorant.

However, the recent incident is being now portrayed as some kind of an armed attack which it was not, and the context of the entire fracas is being forgotten in the melee.

Apparently the MPs who were determined to live up to their once upon a time campaign promise of making a museum of the Mattala airport and a swimming pool of the Hambanthota harbour, went about asking questions at the Mattala airport that gave the officials there the impression that these people are gathering information of the sort that meshes in with the party position that the Mattala airport will one day be converted into a public gallery if and when the UNP is in power.

Word of course had soon got around that the visiting MPs were speaking in a manner that was disparaging of those who were committed professionals serving at Mattala airport in various capacities, and some people in the area who had a stake in the entire issue with theirs kith and kin working in the facility, decided in their frustration at this affront, to take rotten eggs into their hands.

No doubt the situation may have spiraled somewhat out of control subsequent to the initial egg splatter, and various personalities may have shown up showing their political stripes as a consequence.

That matter is under investigation, but in the circumstances that nobody sustained injuries, the entire issue is bound to go down as a custard pie or rotten tomato sort of affair that the British counterparts of our opposition politicians may be able to edify them about, over a breakfast of scrambled egg and toast.

It is well known for instance that the party leader who all of these local MPs unfailingly look up to, has a special place in his heart reserved for British politicians whom he sometimes brings as his special guests to his school big match as well.

In this context it will not be difficult for these MPs to realize that getting some egg on the face, literally, or some custard pie even, once in a while -- is considered an indulgence one makes towards democratic practice in a polity that swears by the electorate.

Rotten eggs are not guns and bombs to be sure, and despite the noxious fumes these quite organic missiles are known to emanate, they are relatively so harmless compared to the grenades and the other incendiary devices that UNP supporters were used to wielding during incidents of post election violence aimed at the SLFP in the past.

Incidentally, former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for instance had shoes thrown at her at a recent public lecture, but she did not blame a ‘vast right wing conspiracy’ for it but said instead that she did not think solid waste disposal did not arouse such intense emotions in people -- as that is the subject she was holding forth on before she was targeted.

In politics a thick skin is a prerequisite, and very often when you can expect the entire kitchen sink to be thrown at you, a few eggs or custard pies can almost be counted as facing a full toss if one were to put all of this in the easy to comprehend cricketing context!

UN KANGAROO COURT

Gathering war crimes evidence the UN way

April 22, 2014, 8:18 pm

article_image

Sri Lanka’s Deputy Permanent Representative at the UN, Maj. Gen. Shavendra Silva shakes hands with UNSG Ban Ki-moon in New York.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Having failed to obtain the anticipated response to its public call for submissions, UNSG Ban Ki-moon’s three-member Panel of Experts (PoE) had no option but to extend the deadline to Dec 31, 2010. The PoE posted a notice in English on the UN website on Oct 27, 2010 calling for submissions on or before Dec 15, 2010. Sinhala and Tamil versions of the notice too, were subsequently posted. The PoE report released on March 31, 2011, acknowledged that the decision to extend the deadline to Dec. 31, though it didn’t give a specific reason.

The PoE comprised former Indonesian Attorney General Marzuki Darusman (Chairman), US attorney-at-law Steven R. Ratner and South African NGO guru Yasmin Sooka. From Oct 27, 2010 to Dec 31, 2010, the PoE received 4,000 submissions from 2,300 persons.

In the backdrop of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) receiving a mandate to go ahead and investigate alleged atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan military as well as the culpability of the political leadership in war crimes, it would be pertinent to examine the circumstances under which the PoE collected information. Such an examination is necessary, particularly because of the controversial confidentiality clause meant to conceal the identity of those 2,300 complainants for 20 years, from the date of the publication of the PoE report.

When the writer raised the issue with UN as well as UNDP Resident Representative in Colombo, Subinay Nandy whether the UN would do away with the confidentiality clause to facilitate the UNHRC probe, the Colombo mission issued the following statement after having consulted UN headquarters. The UN said: "The High Commissioner for Human Rights will now be making arrangements for a comprehensive investigation requested by the UNHRC and the issue of the confidentiality clause will need to be considered at a later stage," (UN to revive 20-year confidentiality clause ‘at a later stage’-The Island April 7, 2014).

The US, the British as well as the EU too, in spite of their push for in international war crimes probe recently ruled out the possibility of them calling for a review of the confidentiality clause (EU too, won’t call for review of 20-year UN confidentiality clause-The Island April 9, 2014).

Sri Lanka’s refusal to cooperate with the investigation undertaken by the UNHRC can be advantageous to those seeking a regime change here. Instead of blanket denial, the government should take tangible action to challenge the very basis of the PoE report as well as the lies propagated by the UK media outfit, Channel 4 News. In case Sri Lanka shunned the investigation, the UNHRC will accept the available information as evidence and proceed swiftly to fault the Sri Lankan government. Sri Lanka will have to successfully challenge the PoE as well as Channel 4 News or face the consequences. There cannot be a better way than pushing the UN/PoE to prove their allegations. Now that the UN is on record as having said that the confidentiality clause will be considered at a ‘later stage’, the government should take it up without further delay. The government will have to discuss this issue at the highest level at the UN without further delay. The writer is of the opinion that the government should ask those international actors active in Sri Lanka during the conflict, including the UN, UN agencies as well as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to come clean about the situation in the Vanni east front (January 2009-May 2009). Sri Lanka should push for an international forum with the participation of member states of the UNHRC as well as the EU to appraise the available information.

Nothing can be as important as releasing a confidential war time dossier prepared by the UN mission in Colombo ahead of the investigation. There cannot be a better ‘source’ than the UN report that dealt with fighting on multiple fronts in the Vanni region, both west and east of the Kandy-Jaffna road from August 2008 to May 13, 2009.The then head of the UN mission in Sri Lanka, Neil Bhune (July 2007-February 2011), supervised the project. Bhune was succeeded by Subinay Nandy. The dossier approved by the UN mission in Colombo estimated the number of deaths at 7,721 and 18,479 wounding during the period from August 2008 to May 13, 2009. However, it didn’t specify losses suffered by the LTTE fighting cadre, a failure even discussed in classified diplomatic cables originating from the US embassy in Colombo, at the height of the war. The UN report was based on information provided by local staff of the UN and other NGOs in the LTTE-held area, the ICRC, religious authorities and other sources. As the UN mission in Colombo can still get in touch with those who had contributed to the report, UN investigators have an opportunity to verify facts.

The UN remains silent on the confidential dossier though it can be of paramount importance. The Sri Lankan government too, is yet to take it up with the UN. Sri Lanka’s failure to push the UN on this issue is surprising, as there cannot be a better way to counter unsubstantiated claims that 40,000 civilians perished during the final phase. Unlike the UN, both PoE and Channel 4 News hadn’t specified the period they meant by the final phase. The bottom line is that as the UN had accurately covered the ground situation for almost ten months (Aug 2008 to May 2009), it can be considered the best possible source. The UN’s failure to record the deaths and injuries from May 14, 2009 to May 19, 2014 cannot justify attempts to disregard the valuable dossier. As the PoE too had an opportunity to examine the UN dossier, there is no reason for any party to object to its release ahead of the investigation targeting Sri Lanka (Government won’t cooperate, but wants secret UN report released-The Island April 9, 2014).

Online petitions

Let me examine the way the PoE may have gathered some of its unsubstantiated information. Those wanting an international war crimes probe had an opportunity to choose from over two dozen sample letters by the Tamil Diaspora to be sent online to the PoE. The Diaspora, while making available 25 samples online, urged those interested in joining the campaign to fill an online petition in case of their inability to write on their own (How Moon panel gathered ‘war crimes ’info revealed-The Island April 21, 2012).

Wouldn’t it be interesting to know whether such online petitioners were among those 2,300 persons covered by the UN’s confidentiality clause?

Sri Lanka should push for a comprehensive examination of all available evidence/information gathered by those wanting to have Sri Lanka investigated for wartime atrocities before they are accepted by the UNHRC. It would be nothing but a catastrophic mistake if Sri Lanka resorted to blanket denial instead of challenging unsubstantiated allegations. If Sri Lanka shunned the investigation, it would be to the advantage of those eyeing a regime change here. They would simply use unverified evidence/information against Sri Lanka. Unless Sri Lanka countered these allegations, they’ll constitute evidence against Sri Lanka, whatever the government’s position on the proposed UNHRC investigation/findings.

Unfortunately, the government seems just satisfied with the decision not to cooperate with the investigation. Sri Lanka’s position that it wouldn’t accept the jurisdiction of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to undertake an investigation is likely to facilitate a US-UK-Canada project targeting Sri Lanka (Prof. Peiris explains why Sri Lanka won’t cooperate with UN probe-The Island April 8, 2014). Regardless of Sri Lanka’s non-participation in the process, the UNHRC will go ahead with planned action. Perhaps, Sri Lanka should privately consult those countries which voted against the resolution moved by the US on March 27, 2014 at the 25th session of the Geneva based UNHRC.

The online petition campaign launched by the Center for War Victims and Human Rights was meant to attract as many Tamils possible. It was launched about a week before the expiry of the first deadline (Dec 15, 2010). The organizers posted a detailed communication from the Secretariat to PoE/PoE on a website named Stop Sri Lanka State Terrorism. The following is the communication:

From: panelofexpertsregistry

WAR CRIME vs. GENOCIDE/ETHNIC CLEANSING EVIDENCE OF TAMILS IN SRILANKA

Dear Sir, Madam,

Thank you for writing to the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts. The Panel appreciates the time you have taken to your share your contribution with it.

The Panel is unable to reply to each individual given the volume of messages received. The responses to a number of frequently asked questions are thus set out below.

Q.: Can I write in Sinhala or Tamil?

A.: Yes, though English, being the Panel’s working language, is preferred.

Q.: Is my submission confidential?

A.: Yes, your submission will be treated as confidential. Neither your name nor identifying particulars will be specified in the Panel’s report.

Q.: When will the Panel make its report?

A.: The Panel anticipates submitting its report in January 2011 (But it was actually released on March 31, 2011)

Q.: Will the Panel’s report be made public?

A.: The report is to the United Nations Secretary-General. He will decide whether to make the report public.

Q.: Can I speak to the Panel in person?

A.: The Panel has a limited time for its work and has therefore chosen to request contributions in the written form detailed in the notice.

Q.: Can I make multiple submissions?

A.: You are requested to raise all issues you wish to raise within the one, single submission.

Q: Can I send my submission in hard copy to a physical address?

A.: Yes. You may send materials to the following address within the timeframe set out in the notice:

Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Sri Lanka

UN Secretariat (Library Building, L-0330 L)

New York, NY 10017

United States of America

Q: Can I submit non-written materials, such as photographs and film clips?

A.: Yes. Please enclose such materials as attachments to your email or mail them to the above address.

Thank you again for taking this opportunity to be in contact with the Panel.

Yours sincerely,

Secretariat of the Panel of Experts

Let me produce a few sample petitions posted on the same website along with the organizers’ statement inviting Tamils to join the campaign:

25 sample letters that you could use to submit your letters to the U.N. (If not already done so) Panel of expert to pressure UN for war crimes investigation on Sri Lanka please use these letters if you do not find time to write your own letters.

Please submit your letter to the U.N Panel, as we have only 08 more days even if you are not directly affected by the conflict and crimes against humanity committed by Sri Lankan forces and its leaders.

Make sure, you attach your postal address and the country of residence in your letter.

The letters does not need to be long, even few lines should do. Please appeal to the panel to ask U.N. to investigate Sri Lanka for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide of Tamils.

The following is the first sample:

To: Mr. Marzuki Darusman, Chairman

To: Mr. Steven Ratner, Panel Member

To: Ms.Yasmin Sooka, Panel Member

Re: Through U.N. investigation Sri Lanka’s war criminals must be brought to books

Tamils in Sri Lanka have gone through several rounds of communal violence tacitly supported by successive Sinhalese lead governments and its armed forces since Independence. Since 1956, Tamil minority rights and Tamils were used as political pawn in Sri Lankan polity to hold on to the power. The minority Tamils were systematically and routinely subjected to all kind of atrocities, including ‘war crimes’, ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘genocide’ in order for the Sinhala political parties to woo the Singhala masses in the name of majority hegemony.

Meanwhile, in another development, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, The Defence Secretary of the Sri Lankan government has threatened to execute Sarath Fonseka, the army commander who delivered victory over the Tamil Tigers, if he continues to suggest that top officials may have ordered war crimes during the final hours of the Tamil war. During an interview with BBC’s Stephen Sackur, Sri Lanka’s defence secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa said General Fonseka was a liar and a traitor.

A US-based activist group, claimed, that it has obtained a 100-page long sworn affidavit from a senior commander of the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) who has fled Sri Lanka seeking asylum for himself and his family. SLA Commander’s affidavit contains incriminating information in several areas.

But more than that, there is substantial body of credible evidence pointing to the commission of war crimes by government forces including attacks on humanitarian operations, attacks on hospitals and deliberate shelling of civilians enticed by the government to seek protection in the safety of "No Fire Zones."

I appeal to the panel of expert to ask the U.N. in no uncertain term that Sri Lanka should be investigated for ‘war crimes’, ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘genocide’.

Yours truly,

Your Name, Contact Postal Address with the Residing country.

The following is the third sample:

To: Mr. Marzuki Darusman, Chairman

To: Mr. Steven Ratner, Panel Member

To: Ms.Yasmin Sooka, Panel Member

Re: Justice delayed itself considered justice denied and it is necessary to reaffirm the international community’s commitment to the principle of accountability on serious violations of international humanitarian law in Sri Lanka.

Arundhati Roy, the acclaimed Indian writer and activist who focuses on issues related to social justice and economic inequality, who also won the Booker Prize in 1997 for her novel, The God of Small Things. For her work as an activist she received the Cultural Freedom Prize awarded by the Lannan Foundation in 2002. She mentioned the last year’s war was not just a war of the Sri Lankans against the Tamil people.

That was a corporate war. All the large Indian companies are now heading to Sri Lanka to make more money," said Arundhati Roy, while speaking at a Chennai convention. She has also voiced her opposition openly on many occasions, condemning India’s silence on the humanitarian tragedy in Sri Lanka, and calling the war "a racist war on Tamils." This should be considered as ‘war crimes’, ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘genocide’ against Tamil citizens of Sri Lanka and impartially investigated by the independent international body and bring justice to the victims as justice delayed itself considered justice denied.

Yours truly,

Your Name, Contact Postal Address with the Residing country.

Due to space constrains, The Island is unable to publish all samples. But the two published samples are loaded with unsubstantiated allegations directed at the government, as well as the mindset of those wanting to haul Sri Lanka up before an international war crimes probe.

To be continued on April 30

Uncle worried about Asia

US’s rising worries in the Asia-Pacific

April 23, 2014, 12:00 pm

US President Barack Obama’s current tour of some of the Asia-Pacific’s foremost states freshly underscores the region’s continuing importance for Washington. Reassuring its allies in the region of US support and succour in times of crisis is apparently one of Obama’s primary aims in visiting South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Malaysia, but indicating that the US could square-up fully to China’s rising economic and military presence in the region may be a closely connected reason for the wide-ranging tour as well.

It could now be said with some certainty that the ‘Asia-Pacific Age’ is upon the world but with rising regional economic vibrancy has come fresh security concerns for particularly the US and its allies in this new growth centre of the globe. Not least of these apprehensions is how these powers could deal with the rising economic, political and military stature of China in the ASEAN and East Asian theatres.

The Asia-Pacific region is rife with some perplexing dilemmas for the powers concerned. The region’s economic inter-dependence with China would not permit these powers to enter into a collision course with the latter. However, they could in no way submit to any perceived Chinese hegemonic dominance either. These issues come into focus in the territorial squabbles many of these South East Asian powers have with China currently. The tensions are quite marked in the case of Japan and South Korea, for instance.

On the other hand, the point is unlikely to be missed on China that a degree of peaceful coexistence with its neighbours is essential for its economic sustenance, although it cannot be argued that China is overwhelmingly dependent on them in this respect. Some commentators have cited a 7 percent growth rate in these neighbours as the economic vibrancy desired by China and it ought to be clear that this growth pace cannot be achieved amid security tensions in the region. Accordingly, unruffled inter-state ties are likely to be desired by China and its neighbours on pragmatic considerations.

The same goes for US-China relations. The degree of economic inter-dependence between the countries is quite considerable although China’s economic integration with its neighbours gives it a distinct edge over the US in some respects. For instance, it is estimated that in 2007, the contribution of BRICS, of which China is a member, to global economic growth, outstripped that of the US for the first time, 30 percent to 20 percent.

So, clearly, the US has reason to be worried. It is at a risk of losing some of its influence and control in the South East Asian region in particular and this prompts it to bolster its ties with its allies in the region. It is possible that the US would play on the security concerns of those states it sees as its allies to further entrench its military presence in the Asia-Pacific region without rousing the animosity of China.

However, the proverbial writing is on the wall to the effect that in the current world order where economics is increasingly driving politics, Western power would be increasingly on the decline in the next couple of decades or thereabouts. It needs to be also considered that an Eastern economic bloc is taking shape, comprising of countries, such as, India, China and Indonesia, whose productivity would constitute one fifth of the world economy, 20 percent of world trade and possess $ 1.5 trillion in monetary reserves.

Accordingly, although military strength would prove important in determining the power of states, it is national economic vibrancy which would emerge as the more crucial factor in their ability to wield global influence, in the final analysis. In fact, economics and not politics is proving to be so crucial that even the ‘classical’ norms of inter-state conduct, such as the inviolability of state boundaries, could be undermined by the major powers with impunity.

This has occurred in Armenia, but the West seems to be impotent in the face of this breach of International Law. The farthest the West could go in this issue is to slap sanctions of numerous kinds on Russia, but we are yet to witness any punitive military action against the latter. The reason for this inner paralysis on the part of the West lies in economic and material considerations. Too much is at stake, in an economic sense, for the parties concerned in this crisis, and they would prefer not to compromise these interests by unleashing tensions of a military kind on each other. Economic globalization, apparently, has generated an unbreachable interdependence among states.

Considering the foregoing, the West would do better to acquire a measure of economic prosperity and independence, if it is to counter-balance the economic vibrancy and productivity of the East. This would enable it to recapture some of its power and influence of the past. A military capability minus economic strength would not prove very effective in current times, where ‘markets’ are prized above almost all else. Nevertheless, military power cannot be sustained by states without sizeable economic might. The Soviet Union learned this the very hard way in the late eighties.

The course to be followed by the developing world or the one-time Third World in this order of things is all too clear. They need to integrate their economies very closely with the best of those in the Asia-pacific region. This would enable them to achieve a degree of economic vibrancy and thereby acquire some political independence.

However, the developing countries would also need to ensure that they bring about within their boundaries equitable economic growth. This would help in narrowing the gap between their vampirical political elites and the masses. Right now, it is clear that the growth path being traversed by the developing world is only benefiting the powerful in their midst. This is a recipe for national destruction.

The West would do better in this situation to help the UN and like international organizations in their trying task of bringing about true development in the Third World. Economic betterment in the developing world would enable the powerful states of the globe to enter into fruitful economic ties with these poorer countries and thereby generate advancement which would benefit all.

pic

UNITED STATES, Oso : US President Barack Obama delivers remarks at the firehouse in Oso, Washington, April 22, 2014, after touring the devastation left by a recent landslide. The death toll from the devastating landslide in the western US state of Washington rose to 41 with the discovery of two more bodies on April 21, 2014, officials said. Dozens of dwellings in the rural town 60 miles (95 kilometers) from Seattle were wiped out in the landslide, which also destroyed part of a highway. AFP