EDITORIAL

Emergent Threat

Kumaratunga will torpedo Oslo’s project - again

As the Norwegian delegation tasked with bringing about negotiations between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers once again returned to London to meet with the LTTE, no doubt bringing with them Sri Lanka's responses to the former's proposals for a permanent and stable ceasefire, the prospects for peace - on the surface, at least - seemed to brighten this week. The LTTE extended its unilateral month-long cessations of hostilities by another month. The government reciprocated.

The LTTE also released ten Sri Lankan prisoners of war. Following the easing last week of the economic embargo on Tamil areas, material is flowing into the Vanni - though by no means as 'a flood,' as some begrudging opponents of ethnic reconciliation in the Sinhala south protested. The United National Front (UNF) government of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is - quite rightly - taking matters a step at a time. The positive reactions from the LTTE and the lack of unmanageably vehement opposition in the Sinhala south to its easing of the economic embargo and restrictions on travel from the Tamil areas will no doubt have been encouraging.

But whilst the optimists might suggest the gestures of goodwill from both sides indicate an inexorable drift towards negotiations, the fragility of the entire Norwegian initiative cannot be underestimated. Numerous problems emerging behind the scenes - traces of which are already manifest in the press - are no doubt keeping Oslo's facilitators busy. The greatest disrupting influence comes, as ever, from President Chandrika Kumaratunga. Apart from the childish tussle with the new government over the Defence and Finance portfolios soon after the UNF came to power, Kumaratunga has, in public at least, avoided confrontation with Wickremesinghe. But last week she entered the fray, forcefully reminding the Parliamentary government that it is "exclusively the President's right to take all actions regarding war and peace." More immediately, given the present focus of Oslo's shuttle diplomacy, Kumaratunga warned that "anything to do with the ceasefire final decision must be taken by the president." Sri Lanka's Defence Minister, Tilak Marapana, nonchalantly dismissed Kumaratunga's assertions, insisting the President must bow to Parliamentary dictat. But the fact that Mr. Wickremesinghe has thus far been overtly careful to tiptoe around Kumaratunga underlies her considerable potential to upset the Norwegian applecart - as she did last year.

Apart from her publicly aired warning shots across Wickremesinghe's bow, Kumaratunga has also been quietly undermining the UNF government's efforts to de-escalate the conflict and establish conditions of normalcy in the Tamil areas. The Sri Lankan armed forces, which come under the President's personal authority, have made no effort to conceal their contempt for Wickremesinghe's efforts for peace. Army chief Lionel Balagalle, a sycophantic Kumaratunga loyalist, has been initiating actions that both threaten the ongoing cessations of hostilities and raise ethnic tensions. SLA troops have been attempting to provoke the LTTE units in Nagarkovil whilst Sinhala soldiers in the eastern province are resolutely maintaining the economic embargo and restrictions of movement on the Tamil areas, despite the Parliamentary directives to the contrary. Tensions are simmering amid the harassment of Tamils - including strip searches of women - by Sinhala soldiers and police in the Batticaloa district. Seasoned observers of Sri Lanka's conflict will recall that historically it is in the eastern province that ethnic goodwill disintegrates before peace talks collapse and a new bout of fighting begins. Little wonder that, as the LTTE has reportedly stressed to the Norwegians, the modalities of ceasefire in this war-ravaged region are particularly critical to the stability of any permanent ceasefire.

As we argued before last month's Parliamentary elections, the UNF's ascent to power poses a challenge to Kumaratunga's political future. This year is crucial to her and to Mr. Wickremesinghe's government. That Sri Lanka's political system isn't big enough for both is clear to all. If the UNF does not impeach Kumaratunga this year, the President will undoubtedly dissolve Parliament after December - as the constitution enables her to. If there are to be fresh elections after that, Kumaratunga will beforehand seek to deny Wickremesinghe the stable economy in the pursuit of which is driving the UNF's efforts at ethnic reconciliation. In other words, she will endeavour to comprehensively sabotage, even scuttle, the Norwegian peace initiative. The limited peace dividend already being enjoyed by Sri Lanka's peoples is fuelling new enthusiasm for a negotiated settlement to the conflict - an anathema to Kumaratunga, who cherishes command over a historic defeat of the Tamil independence struggle in the name of Sinhala hegemony. Her former People's Alliance (PA) government demonstrated a callous disregard for Sinhala suffering and Tamil anguish in the pursuit of this ambition, readily sacrificing thousand of Sinhala soldiers while wreaking havoc in the Tamil homeland. Whilst the irredeemable optimists may argue that Kumaratunga will this year be swept along with a tide of peace, seasoned observers of Sri Lanka's conflict know that she will not. Which is why, positive gestures and backslapping notwithstanding, the Norwegian initiative faces a renewed threat from an old enemy.

One for All

The US cannot laud ideals and ignore them in practice

The United States this week came under increasing criticism over its treatment of al-Qaida and Taliban suspects from several quarters, including human rights organisations and, perhaps more importantly, from its closest allies in the coalition against terrorism. British disquiet - expressed with characteristic understatement - comes mainly after officially sanctioned photographs taken in Camp X-Ray, the detention centre at the US base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, showed the humiliating treatment of the prisoners, manacled hand and foot and kneeling before their guards.

But the more profound concern from many is regarding the basis of the detentions themselves: the US refuses to accept the Geneva Conventions apply to these prisoners and Guantanamo Bay is not US territory, denying them protection under the US constitution. The US has reacted indignantly to the criticism, insisting it is complying with international law and pointing out that it is extending the prisoners better treatment than could have been expected for Americans in Taliban or al-Qaida hands. But relativism is no defence here, for - as many point out - the Taliban or al-Qaida can hardly be a yardstick for the 'civilised world.'

Yet American outrage is understandable. The pitiless massacres of thousands of people, overwhelmingly civilians, on September 11 must, the US argues, be borne in mind and concern for the comfort of those who endorsed, perhaps assisted and arguably applauded the attacks in New York and Washington is misplaced. The most striking matter, however, is the charge of hypocrisy. The US has proclaimed civil liberties and human rights to be central to its vision of the ideal political system: liberal democracy. Yet both have been readily ignored in Washington's justified campaign to root out and destroy its implacable enemies - something the US has deemed unacceptable when perpetrated by other state and non-state actors - usually when it involves those whose political beliefs America does not share. Many of the world's liberation struggles, including the Tamil freedom struggle, have been condemned and blacklisted on the basis that, justness of cause notwithstanding, some of the tactics employed by the oppressed run contrary to these ideals. Ironically, the US is falling back on the same defences of relativism and just cause often proffered by those it has criticised.

America has envisioned a global international order based on democracy, human rights and international law. It wanted to act as a beacon for the rest of mankind, believing it has a messianic role in this regard. But if the US considers its society and governance to be the utopian model for the world to emulate, its international conduct should be a perfection in democracy. America's conduct should not be - as Judge Richard Goldstone, a former war crimes prosecutor, protested - "a shocking example to set others."