World Affairs

 Failure of Sri Lankan diplomacy

Despite assurances being made by our globe trotting Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama and President Mahinda Rajapakse himself that Sri  Lanka’s standing in the international community was not a matter for concern, we are informed that the UN Human Rights Council will hold a special session on ‘The Human Rights Situation in Sri Lanka’ on  May 22.

Earlier the Security Council of the UN (UNSC) for the first time discussed the human rights situation in this country despite strenuous efforts made by Sri Lankan diplomats to stall that discussion. Only the veto powers enjoyed by Russia and China prevented a resolution being considered by the UNSC.

Of the 48 members of the Human Rights Commission (HRC), 17 countries called for the special session (one more than required). Among the signatories calling for the special sessions were countries which had good relations earlier with this country such as Mauritius.

Chile and Mauritius are members of the Non Aligned Movement. During the 25 year old conflict there were many attempts made for the HRC to discuss the Sri Lankan situation but despite allegations made against Sri Lanka being as serious, discussions were avoided. Sri Lankan citizens who have suffered propaganda barrages of the successes of our foreign policy will be tempted to ask, where our friends are in times of need.

Where is SAARC or the Non Aligned Movement? Perhaps they cannot act together as distinct organisations but what of nations acting as individual members? Do we hear one voice saying: Stop bullying Sri Lanka!

Sponsors not convinced

Despite a human rights disaster being avoided with the entrapped civilians being rescued from the clutches of the LTTE, the sponsors of this special session have gone through with it. Obviously very powerful forces such as the United States and Britain have been at work.  Disaster Management and Human Rights Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe’s argument that 250,000 civilians were liberated and that there was no special cause for discussion of the human rights situation by the HRC, has not convinced the sponsors.

The continuous coverage of the conflict and now the pitiable and pathetic state of civilians in IDP camps by three international TV channels — BBC, CNN and al Jazeera — would have swayed even those not acting in concert with the pro Western countries. During recent times it became quite apparent that the Sri Lanka government though it was winning on the battlefront was losing the propaganda war.

Journalists’ squabble

Foreign news agencies as well as Sri Lankan journalists were banned from the theatre of war. In Third World conflicts when reporters are kept away from scenes of battle, governments that do so, lock horns with the journalist tribe. Even Israel that has good relations with the Western media came into quite a lot of stick recently when they were kept out of the Gaza Strip while Israeli rockets and planes pulverised civilian Palestinian targets.

Sri Lanka has had quite a lot of experience with these foreign correspondents during the past three decades. It would have been prudent not to antagonise the media. But finally it turned out to be a determined and united onslaught by the foreign media on the conduct of the war by the government forces.

We are not certain whether this media onslaught was orchestrated and the media institutions were acting in concert with the big powers. But the consequences have been that of a disastrous image being projected to the outside world. Most of the scenes projected on TV by all three channels were identical save for the sequences. And all the while there was repetition of no journalists being permitted into the battle zones, camps or hospitals. Thus the question arises whether these were edited films of the LTTE or some clandestine sources.

Another question that would be obviously asked is why independent reporters and observers were not permitted into the scenes of war, if as the government claimed it was fought by them strictly according to rules of engagement?  Government forces may have their own reasons for not permitting interlopers in the scenes of battle but it did cost them the propaganda war.

Diplomatic muscle flexing

From the commencement of Rajapakse’s march to power it was apparent that he was not seeing eye-to-eye with Western powers. Soon he was identified as a ‘hardliner’ as opposed to Ranil Wickremesinghe who went along with the Western powers and negotiated for peace with the LTTE. Rajapakse’s policy paid dividends — militarily. And that undoubtedly mattered most. But the present diplomatic quagmire has been the result.

The present humanitarian crisis could be over in a few months. Greater humanitarian crises have eased out with time. More difficult would be the fall out of the diplomatic muscle flexing that has been going on for sometime. Sri Lanka has been the Mouse that Roared and we have been doing it for quite a while. Not all — certainly not Big Brothers of the West — take kindly to mice that roar.

May 22 in Geneva will be a crucial day in the HRC. Adroit diplomacy will be the need of the hour rather than the roars of mice or Sinhala lions.