'Pain' of Sri Lanka aid pullout

Fears of a humanitarian crisis are mounting in northern Sri Lanka as troops press ahead with an offensive to capture territory from Tamil rebels. A week ago the UN and other agencies pulled out of the area, where more than 200,000 people are displaced by fighting. Here one aid worker describes how hard it was to leave.

Fears as UN agencies pull out of Sri Lankan conflict zone

Posted By: Peter Foster at Sep 18, 200 at 10:39:10 [General] Posted in: Foreign Correspondents

Full story

Rajapakse was elected on a ‘war ticket’

The news that UN agencies and other international NGOs have been ordered to pull out of the Tamil-controlled areas of northern Sri Lanka should be greeted with great foreboding. Some international observers fear their departure clears the way for Sri Lankan forces to act with unrestrained ferocity against Tamil rebels and their civilian populations now caught up in the fighting. In recent weeks, one US-based rights group, TamilsAgainstGenocide, has even used the ‘G' word in the Sri Lankan context, engaging former US associate attorney general Bruce Fein to seek international war crimes indictments against three senior Sri Lankan officials, including the army chief, Gen Sarath Fonseka, who hold US green cards. [ full story comments ]

A humanitarian tragedy in the making

By Dr. Pakiasothy Saravanamuttu

As the march of the forces into the Wanni progresses, the key issue remains as always, the plight of the civilians. Currently, in the middle of September, there is the serious danger of a major humanitarian crisis, potentially involving anywhere between 200,000 to 300,000 civilians. Something has to be done about this and fast. The imperative of defeating terrorism should not be at the cost of civilian lives and welfare and as a consequence, sustain conflict beyond the point at which military victory is heralded.

Pull out order

The government has asked the UN and other humanitarian agencies to pull out of the Wanni – personnel, vehicles, equipment and all. The ostensible reasons given pertain to security and the argument that another Muttur massacre must be averted at all costs.
The UN and other agencies have complied and will continue to do so even though civilians in the Wanni have demonstrated against this and implored them not to leave. As far as the UN is concerned the pull out constitutes not an "evacuation" but, a "relocation" to Vavuniya.
As the government repeatedly reminds the UN – it is here on the invitation of the government. Furthermore, it is the established practice and indeed norm, that member states provide for and are responsible for the security of the UN presence in their territory.
The established norms, conventions and practices of international relations notwithstanding, it is reasonable to ask in light of the demonstrations by the civilian population, as to whether there are other and more compelling norms and conventions which should govern the relationship between the UN and the host country and member state.

At the government’s bidding

Is it the case that the UN is here on the invitation of the government and therefore willy, nilly does the government’s bidding even in the face of a major humanitarian crisis – the kind of catastrophe the UN was set up to avert? There appears to be no better example of the comprehensively state centric nature of the UN than this one – unless of course it is timidity, pure and simple.
Two clear messages come out of this situation. The first is that the civilians in their despair still find some security in a UN and international humanitarian agency presence. Caught between two callous protagonists – one who wants them out of the Wanni and the other who wants them in – the civilians look to international bodies and agencies for what the state, of which they are citizens, should be providing them – security.
The second is that whatever the government may say in its defence regarding civilian protection, it is manifestly apparent that the civilians are not going to move into Vavuniya as the government would like them to. And the reasons for this are many – the LTTE keeps them in through force and intimidation; they are loathe to leave family members who have been recruited to the LTTE; some indeed are staunch Tamil nationalists.

Dreaded prospect

For many though, as this columnist was told in Vavuniya by humanitarian workers who had come out of the Wanni, the prospect of languishing in a welfare camp in Vavuniya is dreaded more than having to endure the trials and tribulations of the Wanni. The reports of abduction in these camps, of poor facilities and a general perception – founded on fact in certain cases – that the welfare camps are better characterized as "detention centres" were cited as the reasons for this.
What this means is that, as the Defence Secretary no less opined, the regime has many miles to go in earning the trust of the civilian population in the Wanni, and of the Tamil population in particular.
Vilified to a ludicrous extent as the conceptual underpinning of an international conspiracy to subvert the sovereignty of this country, the idea of the Responsibility to Protect as integral to that of sovereignty in the 21st century, must be on the agenda of public discourse here and abroad in respect of the present situation in the country.

Collateral damage

Who is there to care and provide for these Sri Lankans? Are they to be treated as mere "collateral" damage in the drive to consolidate the majoritarian status quo one the one hand and to protect a fanatical secessionist outfit on the other? The state may control more territory by the day, but it is not winning hearts and minds in anywhere near similar measure, as indeed it must.
And as the reports cited above indicate, it has to act fast in respect of human rights violations and erase beyond a shadow of doubt any perception that the people trapped in the Wanni may have, with regard to any form of "collective punishment" if they were to move out into Vavuniya.
The challenge confronting the Rajapakse regime as far as its current war strategy is concerned is about what to do in the event the people do not move out of the Wanni. The rest of the country has been led to believe and there is great expectation on this score, that victory is both imminent and certain.

Siege tactics

On the ground in the Wanni, this will result in heavy civilian casualties. Desisting from military action such as bombing that would result in heavy civilian casualties, and yet not letting up on moving onto Kilinochchi and the rest of the Wanni, could result in the use of siege tactics to force the population out.
In the face of all of this, is it not possible for religious leaders of all faiths and business leaders of all hues – two groups that have leverage – to bring their collective clout to augment the appeals of other sections of civil society to ensure that the disaster and humanitarian tragedy feared, will be avoided?
At the present moment, it is only some religious groups and the suspect "foreign funded" NGOs that are focusing on this issue. The rest of the merciful and compassionate, dynamic and energetic are silent. Are they too waiting for victory at whatever cost?
Victory in the Wanni must not sustain protracted conflict. Were this to be the case, it would be no victory at all.

Sri Lanka bars foreign aid staff

An estimated 85,000 people have fled their homes in the area since June, according to the United Nations.

Sri Lanka bars foreign aid staff

Sri Lanka's government has announced a ban on foreign aid workers and many of their local colleagues from working in Tamil-rebel held areas in the north. Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa said Colombo could no longer guarantee the safety of aid workers in the area.
Colombo has intensified its war against the Tamil Tigers in a drive to crush their decades-old separatist struggle.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7604933.stm
Aid agencies have been helping some of an estimated 160,000 people displaced by the fighting in the north. They have in the past voiced concern for tens of thousands of people who have fled the frontline and sought refuge from the violence deep inside rebel-held territory.
The agencies have yet to respond to the government's announcement.
An estimated 85,000 people have fled their homes in the area since June, according to the United Nations.
Meanwhile, medical workers say 10 people have been injured in a blast in Colombo. A military spokesman told the BBC that the minor explosion appeared to have been caused by a grenade or homemade device.
One report suggested that gang rivalry was behind the attack, and that it was not linked to the island's civil war.
'Dangerous environment'
The government said the ban would apply to all foreign aid workers in rebel-held territory and to their local colleagues who were not permanently resident in the area.
"We can't assure the security of these people," Defence Secretary Rajapaksa told The Associated Press news agency. "We are taking precautions."
Mr Rajapaksa said any people affected by the ban who were currently in the area should leave immediately.
He said his government wished to avoid a repeat of the murder in 2006 of 17 local employees of French aid agency, Action Against Hunger.
Sri Lanka's government said Tamil rebels carried out the attack but international truce monitors said the killings were the work of the military.
A United Nations official last year described Sri Lanka as one of the world's most dangerous environments for humanitarian workers, prompting an angry rebuttal from the government.
The Tamil Tigers have been fighting for a separate homeland in the north and east for 25 years.
More than 70,000 people have died in the conflict.
Do you work for an NGO in northern Sri Lanka? Are you affected by this announcement? Send us your experiences.
In most cases a selection of your comments will be published, displaying your name and location unless you state otherwise in the box below.
Name
Your E-mail address
Town & Country
Phone number (optional):
Comments
Story from BBC NEWS:http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/7604933.stmPublished: 2008/09/08 17:43:19 GMT© BBC MMVIII

Sri Lanka's Tamils Deserve More Freedom

Sri Lanka's Tamils Deserve More FreedomSeptember 3, 2008
(From today's Wall Street Journal Asia)

Your Aug. 28 editorial, "The Sri Lankan Solution" is incomplete and misleading. The majority Sinhalese government did not gain control over the eastern province. They have been accused of holding improper elections (under military rule) in the east, where the government's paramilitary partner allegedly was the winner.

In the early 1950s, the majority Sinhalese began dividing Sri Lanka along ethnic lines, denying Tamils their civil rights. Since the militarization of the Tamil liberation struggle in the early 1970s, this division has become semi-permanent. From the Tamils' point of view -- 50 years of painful memory -- the Sinhalese will never agree to treat the Tamils equally and as such there can be no peace for the Sinhalese and Tamils within a united Sri Lanka.
Only international intervention, forceful implementation of an equitable devolution package with internationally guaranteed safeguards may create a peaceful, united Sri Lanka. The leaders in the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Japan and even here in the United States have begun to understand the true intentions of the Sinhalese and their government against the minority Tamils.
Siva Sivalogan Dedham, Mass.
While I appreciate your arguments, there is a lot more that can be said about this issue. Through six decades of independence, Sri Lanka has proven to be good at only one thing -- "ethnic politics." If they gave out Olympic medals for poor governance, Sri Lanka would take the gold, silver and bronze. Sri Lanka's ethnic crisis is a self-inflicted wound and an accurate description of poor governance by its leaders. What is less accurate is the lack of its reputation that Sri Lanka is a terror state whose predatory territorial aims are anchored in intolerance, discrimination and destruction of the Tamil minority.
Decades of bellicose response from the "government" resurrected negative sentiments among the Tamil minority, so they assembled, organized and resisted, first peacefully, then by armed insurrection -- to contend or suggest otherwise is, at best, poor history. Tamils much prefer a homeland of their own, which includes ample constitutional protection with no room for abuses by the state, than the one in which they are currently living where atrocities are inflicted upon them daily by a thug state run by goons in suits masquerading as defenders of democracy and eradicators of terror.
It is high time for Tamils to be able to live in a country of their own without looking back, given the less than hospitable treatment that they have received from Sri Lanka. We, in the democratic tradition, must respond in kind by firmly supporting indigenous peoples' right to freedom and right for their own state after such protracted suffering -- a state that seeks to protect and advance the welfare of Tamils and dwell in peace and harmony with neighbors. The sad reality is that Sri Lanka's aim is more about eradication of Tamils than eradication of terror, while the West looks on tacitly supporting Sri Lankan tyranny.
Roy Ratnavel Vancouver, British Columbia