Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Locked
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

krishnan wrote:16:05 Anti-Lanka vote: 25 for (including India), 3 against: Just In: The United States resolution pulling up Sri Lanka for human rights violations, at the United Nations Human Rights Council meeting in Geneva, has been passed with 25 votes in favour of it, including by India. Thirteen nations voted against the resolution, including Pakistan, and there were eight abstentions.
It is in the interest of EvanJihadis that India's relations with Sri Lanka go downhill. The whole DMK-UPA charade was masterminded by the West.

UPA wanted a political reason to go against India's national interests. The DMK charade gave them one!

Congratulations India! Our whole foreign policy is now controlled by West and EvanJihadis! This has absolutely nothing to do with the Tamils! Who really in the world gives a damn about Tamils except India? Does USA, UK, China or anybody else really gives a damn about whether Tamils live or die? So why did we allow EvanJihadis, be they in Tamil Nadu, in Tamil Eezham, among the Tamil diaspora in the West, among the Sinhalese political parties, leading the Congress, or in partnership with Beijing and Pindi, to bring down Indian Foreign Policy?

Today Tamil politics is controlled by EvanJihadis & UK, Sinhalese politics is controlled by Beijing (in coordination with the Anglo-Americans), Delhi politics is controlled by Vatican, USA and Saudi Arabia!

Where are the Bharatiyas?
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

thusitha wrote:
RajeshA
I can well imagine this painting of Sinhalese Buddhism as extremist variety or as turning extremist (aka Paki) a well-coordinated plan!
Where have you seen Buddhist monk detonating bombs. Yes we have some radical Buddhist monks amidst us, but that is not the majority of the monks. I am sure India would have your own set of Radical Hindus
I am sure only a few are radical! It is important to find out whether they are being played as well! It is also important to find out why so many Sinhalese Christians have such an inordinate political influence in Sri Lanka!
svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4727
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by svenkat »

Rajesh Aji,
You are oversimplifying issues.
For sinhalese,tamils are invaders from TN.Its strong chozha kingdoms which invaded SL.there has never been any indigenous strong tamizh kingdom in Eezham.Even today,its TN which is sustaining the struggle after the gora intervention collapsed.

From tamizh view,the sinhalese are 'aryan speakers' from 'North' india who are tormenting tamils in the traditional homelands.The fact remains that tamizh people are majority in North and East and they are leaderless and their lands being sinhalised while the Aryans in delhi are quiet because its the 'fellow aryan speakers' who are extending aryan spaces and sinhalese and non-tamils have no conflict of interest.

The tamizh national view is of going into lanka to support tamizh brethren.tamils are seeking extra-territorial intervention from an indian view,but from a tamizh national view,they want to go to tamizh land to support tamizh people.

Almost impossible situation for GOI.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

thusitha wrote:
SwamyG
Post subject: Re: Sri Lanka - News and DiscussionPosted: 20 Mar 2013 20:48

BRF Oldie
Nice try there....more fear mongering. Whoaa....tamil nation. You Indians should be scared because tamilians will ask for a separate 'naadu' and want to secede from India, huh?
Mate, in 70's Sinahalese must have been saying something similar to you.
For a start how about treating tamilians as a regular citizens, huh?
Go to Colombo, you will see most of the business are run by either Tamils or Muslims. What do you want us to give Tamils, that they haven't already got?
Look at the placards the LTTE carry, 1/3 or land and 2/3 of sea, for 12 % of the people. In Sri Lanka the majority has been treated like the minority for far too long. Good examples of nations such as Sri lanka is Iraq, Syria, Baharain. What Tamils are finding difficult is harder to give control the Sinhalese. As in any nation every individual should be treated equally, Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslims.
If the Sinhalese had the view in the 70s, then they had it coming for them. India is not Sri Lanka, and Sri Lanka is not India. Your constitution has a special article for Buddhism and its protection. It is your country, and you chose your way of life and polity. Don't ask us what Srilankan tamilians want; you figure it out between the two of you. It is like a marriage, and both of you are washing your dirty laundry out in the public. From an Indian stand point, India could do less with the refugees. From a humanitarian view point Sri Lanka could do less with the killings - from both sides. From a Hindu perspective, Buddhists can do less about destroying the temples, from a tamil's perspective Sri Lanka could do less about Sinhalsation of the tamils.

The tamilians are the majority in their part of the land, while Sinhalese are the majority if you consider the whole of the island. Concentration of population along these lines have existed for ages, it was not manufactured yesterday. Yeah, expecting to treat each other with respect and fairness is all fine and dandy. Your Constitution guarantees it, on paper, what matters is the reality and perception.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

:rotfl: So all this is European and EJ's saajish, huh? :rotfl:
I can well imagine this painting of Sinhalese Buddhism as extremist variety or as turning extremist (aka Paki) a well-coordinated plan!
:rotfl: Oh my the Buddhists are so peaceful onlee. It is like Richard Gere talking :mrgreen: The Buddhists in Asia have been violent through their history. Ahimsa vhimsa all good on paper or in thoughts onlee.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

svenkat ji

Well the Sinhalese themselves came to Sri Lanka led by the great Prince Vijaya from West Bengal, so they can hardly claim to be original inhabitants, especially as it is written that the island was not uninhabited.

Tamil Nadu is just over the Palk Strait, and earlier when the sea level were down would have been easily passable.

So what is closer to Sri Lanka - West Bengal or Tamil Nadu?

This is important for both sides to understand, so that they can agree that based on history, nobody really can claim privilege and priority over the island. Both linguistic groups have to share the island!

As far as Aryan-Dravidian thing is concerned, well somebody would have to tell the politicos, media, educators, etc. that that is just one big lie and that it is high time to come out of this lie cocoon.

So why is it impossible for GoI?

GoI can surely start a campaign of awareness that history does not give any group preference over the other, nor is the racial divide scientifically substantiated. All this is such heaps of nonsense, and the only thing is that both parties agree to recognize the other and the other's rights!

And if after the whole education campaign does not yield results, GoI should simply tell both the parties that they have 3 years to look for an amicable solution, and if they fail then India is simply going to ride roughshod over them and impose a solution. India considers both groups to be part of the Indian Civilization and India will take it upon herself to impose peace and justice, regardless of what the world says.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

SwamyG wrote::rotfl: So all this is European and EJ's saajish, huh? :rotfl:
I can well imagine this painting of Sinhalese Buddhism as extremist variety or as turning extremist (aka Paki) a well-coordinated plan!
:rotfl: Oh my the Buddhists are so peaceful onlee. It is like Richard Gere talking :mrgreen: The Buddhists in Asia have been violent through their history. Ahimsa vhimsa all good on paper or in thoughts onlee.
It is not a question of violence and extremism by any Buddhist, or for that matter some extremist of some other religion, but rather a question of channelizing these tendencies, which means that the extremist shows his extremism at time and place of choosing of the other so as to have the desired impact, and to support extremists with resources.
Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4080
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Lilo »

Text of the UN Human Rights Council resolution against Sri Lanka -2013

The Human Rights Council,

Reaffirming the purposes and principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations,

Guided by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenants on Human Rights and other relevant instruments,

Bearing in mind General Assembly resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006,

Recalling Council resolutions 5/1 and 5/2 of 18 June 2007, on institution-building of the Human Rights Council,

Recalling Human Rights Council resolution 19/2 of 22 March 2012 on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka,

Reaffirming that it is the responsibility of each State to ensure the full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms of its entire population,

Reaffirming also that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law, as applicable,

Welcoming the announcement by the Government of Sri Lanka to hold elections to the Provincial Council in the Northern Province in September 2013,

Welcoming and acknowledging the progress made by the Government of Sri Lanka in rebuilding infrastructure, demining, resettling the majority of internally displaced persons, and noting nonetheless that considerable work lies ahead in the areas of justice, reconciliation and resumption of livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these efforts,

Taking note of the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of Sri Lanka and its findings and recommendations, and acknowledging its possible contribution to the process of national reconciliation in Sri Lanka,

Taking note of the National Plan of Action to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of the Government of Sri Lanka and its commitments as set forth in response to the findings and recommendations of the Commission,

Noting that the national plan of action does not adequately address all of the findings and constructive recommendations of the Commission,

Recalling the constructive recommendations contained in the Commission’s report, including the need to credibly investigate widespread allegations of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, demilitarize the north of Sri Lanka, implement impartial land dispute resolution mechanisms, re-evaluate detention policies, strengthen formerly independent civil institutions, reach a political settlement on the devolution of power to the provinces, promote and protect the right of freedom of expression for all and enact rule of law reforms,

Noting with concern that the National Plan of Action and the Commission’s report do not adequately address serious allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law,

Expressing concern at the continuing reports of violations of human rights in Sri Lanka, including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, torture, and violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, as well as intimidation of and reprisals against human rights defenders, members of civil society and journalists, threats to judicial independence and the rule of law, and discrimination on the basis of religion or belief,

Calling upon the Government of Sri Lanka to fulfil its public commitments, including on the devolution of political authority, which is integral to reconciliation and the full enjoyment of human rights by all members of its population,

Expressing appreciation for the efforts of the Government of Sri Lanka in facilitating the visit of a technical mission from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and encouraging the Government to increase its dialogue and cooperation with the Office of the High Commissioner,

Noting the High Commissioner’s call for an independent and credible international investigation into alleged violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law,

1. Welcomes the report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on advice and technical assistance for the Government of Sri Lanka on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka[1] and the recommendations and conclusions contained therein, in particular on the establishment of a truth-seeking mechanism as an integral part of a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to transitional justice;

2. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations made in the report of the Office of the High Commissioner, and also calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka to conduct an independent and credible investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as applicable;

3. Reiterates its call upon the Government of Sri Lanka to implement effectively the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and to take all necessary additional steps to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and commitment to initiate credible and independent actions to ensure justice, equity and accountability, and reconciliation for all Sri Lankans;

4. Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to cooperate with special procedures mandate holders and to respond formally to their outstanding requests, including by extending invitations and providing access;

5. Encourages the Office of the High Commissioner and relevant special procedures mandate holders to provide, in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Government of Sri Lanka, advice and technical assistance on implementing the above-mentioned steps;

6. Requests the Office of the High Commissioner, with input from relevant special procedures mandate holders, as appropriate, to present an oral update to the Human Rights Council at its twenty-fourth session, and a comprehensive report followed by a discussion at the twenty-fifth session, on the implementation of the present resolution

Co-sponsors of the resolution;

Austria, Canada, Croatia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, St Kitts and Nevis, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

RajeshA wrote: It is not a question of violence and extremism by any Buddhist, or for that matter some extremist of some other religion, but rather a question of channelizing these tendencies, which means that the extremist shows his extremism at time and place of choosing of the other so as to have the desired impact, and to support extremists with resources.
Humans are violent. That is why we need checks and balances. That is why security and stability are most essential for any civilization/country. And each civilization/country better figure how to have the stability - progress is possible only when there is peace, stability and security for the people.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

Co-sponsors of the resolution;

Austria, :evil: Canada, Croatia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, :rotfl: Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, St Kitts and Nevis, Sweden, Switzerland, :rotfl: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland :lol: and United States of America. :rotfl:
These are former colonials, postage stamp countries with money laundering facilitities, financially insolvent counttries, arms peddlers and declining powers.

India should vote against the resolution and have bilateral talks with Sri Lanka on the Tamil question.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

ramana wrote: India should vote against the resolution and have bilateral talks with Sri Lanka on the Tamil question.
Exactly. Pull a closed door meeting. Offer carrots and stick. Sri Lanka is a brat, and it needs to be told throwing tantrums is not a solution.
nvishal
BRFite
Posts: 992
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:03

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by nvishal »

UN has vote in favour of a resolution that has condemned srilanka for serious war crimes

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (25): Argentina, Austria, Benin, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Guatemala, India, Ireland, Italy, Libya, Montenegro, Peru, Poland, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Sierra Leone, Spain, Switzerland and United States.

Against (13): Congo, Ecuador, Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Mauritania, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Thailand, Uganda, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.


Abstentions (8): Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya and Malaysia.
Agnimitra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5150
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Agnimitra »

Sri Lankan (and Myanmarese) Buddhist treatment of Moslems is increasingly in focus
Sri Lanka’s Muslim minority is increasingly finding itself the target of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalists: a campaign against halal, attacks on mosques, boycott of their businesses, hate speech, intimidation and threats. Many concerned social activists, researchers and commentators have attempted to grapple with current manifestations of this phenomenon with a view to shaping meaningful and effective responses by furthering our understanding of its socio-political and economic dimensions.
Gurus, a question: Is it possible that at this point Indian diplomacy has become so weak and feckless that if SL were to attempt another annexation of Maldives (and subsequent uprooting of Islamism there), GoI would only be able to stand and watch (and perhaps moralize for good effect)?
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7101
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by shyamd »

SL is not listening and they need a kick in the behind. Every time we go to Colombo for some tough talk - they promise this and that and that the TNA don't want to talk. They ask us to help talk to TNA!
Theo_Fidel

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Theo_Fidel »

thusitha wrote:Go to Colombo, you will see most of the business are run by either Tamils or Muslims. What do you want us to give Tamils, that they haven't already got?
Look at the placards the LTTE carry, 1/3 or land and 2/3 of sea, for 12 % of the people. In Sri Lanka the majority has been treated like the minority for far too long. Good examples of nations such as Sri lanka is Iraq, Syria, Baharain. What Tamils are finding difficult is harder to give control the Sinhalese. As in any nation every individual should be treated equally, Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslims.
I have heard this particular song and dance from several Singhalese. Of course the Lankan tamils are no angels either.

First we must remember how this 12% figure came about. Back in the 70’s, the Lankan tamils were about 12% while the highland tamils were approaching 12%-14%. Between them they would have made a solid 25% or so. In stepped IG in her usual blundering way and agreed to repatriate about ½ the highland tamils about 600,000 or so. Many in TN warned her not to do this but IG was being IG. Playing with fire as usual.

So from a situation where the tamils were a hop skip and jump from a 1/3 veto power they were reduced to less than 20% political non-entity. One suspects this was the first time the Singhalese felt confident enough to take the Tamils on. Even now lankans refuse to count the 6% highland Lankan tamils in with their data. I blame IG for disturbing the demographic balance of the island. And even more she then went on to create the LTTE. Of course many of the highland tamils never got citizenship so that question remains outstanding…..

There is still a 300,000 strong refugee population in TN and another 200,000 or so scattered around the world. If these groups returned the population would again rival 25%. I think it all comes down to demographics, Singhalese are confident they can assimilate or drive out 12% population chunk. A 25% demographic balance forces them to moderate their choices….
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

How come UK did not vote for or agaisnt when they were one of the sponsors of the resolution!!!!
Co-sponsors of the resolution;

Austria, Canada, Croatia, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Malta, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, St Kitts and Nevis, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States of America.
vs
UN has vote in favour of a resolution that has condemned srilanka for serious war crimes

The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (25): Argentina, Austria, Benin, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Guatemala, India, Ireland, Italy, Libya, Montenegro, Peru, Poland, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Sierra Leone, Spain, Switzerland and United States.

Against (13): Congo, Ecuador, Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Mauritania, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Thailand, Uganda, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

Abstentions (8): Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya and Malaysia.

This means India voted not in national interests.
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4833
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Yayavar »

ramana wrote:This means India voted not in national interests.
In the history thread it was mentioned that India was looking at short term emotive issues - Tamil diaspora at expense of Indian interests. Of course the govt at the center is thereby also looking at its survival not in national interest. Why blame BD influx, or ummah transnational viewpoint or any other such groupings that are regional or community based in outlook..
sourab_c
BRFite
Posts: 187
Joined: 14 Feb 2009 18:07
Location: around

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by sourab_c »

viv wrote:
ramana wrote:This means India voted not in national interests.
In the history thread it was mentioned that India was looking at short term emotive issues - Tamil diaspora at expense of Indian interests. Of course the govt at the center is thereby also looking at its survival not in national interest. Why blame BD influx, or ummah transnational viewpoint or any other such groupings that are regional or community based in outlook..

Tamil diaspora is part of India and its interests are not mutually exclusive to our national interests. We have been betrayed by Sri Lanka. We supported their war and they started getting cozy with the Chinese as soon as the war ended. If they want to be the next Cuba, so be it. They will be foolish to cut bilateral ties with India.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59874
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by ramana »

Hindu reports:

LINK
Colombo rejects U.S.-backed resolution, says it is "replete with misrepresentations" on the current situation; 25 countries vote in favour, while 13 nations including Pakistan vote against India refrained from moving oral amendments to the resolution on Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) after it became clear that the main sponsors, especially the U.S., were in no mood to make changes owing to fears that some African countries might abstain or cross over and oppose the resolution, said official sources in the Ministry of External Affairs. While 25 countries, including India, voted in favour, 13 countries, including Pakistan, voted against and eight abstained.

When India’s Permanent Representative to UN Dileep Sinha was summoned here, Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai asked him to move seven amendments. On reaching Geneva, Mr. Sinha contacted his American counterpart and informed him about India’s desire. The principal amendment would have brought the progress made by Sri Lanka in implementing the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) under the gaze of the international community.

The U.S., after consulting other co-sponsors of the resolution, :rotfl: came back to India late on Wednesday and said the incorporation of Indian amendments could lead to a fracture in the alliance favouring the resolution. These included some African countries who, as it is, were uneasy allies. From Asia, while Japan was mollified by Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s recent visit and voted against the resolution, South Korea, with a newly elected government, was a cat on the wall (it finally voted with India and the United States).

The U.S. Permanent Representative told Mr. Sinha that his country wanted to increase the margin as compared to last time rather than see a depletion in the strength of those questioning Sri Lanka’s human rights record during the closing phases of the conflict between its security forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.

Therefore, said official sources here, India decided not to press for amendments and fell in line with the resolution as hammered together by the U.S. and other co-sponsors. “We would have been seen as disruptive rather than constructive. It just didn’t work out,” said official sources.
What numbnuts. So the US did not allow them to move any amendments yet they voted for it!

Japan had more guts and voted against it. and they are spinning as molified by a visti from Rajapakse. he would have visited delhi any number oif time sif that was the reasosn!
As by then they knew that the resolution would pass why not abstain? They wanted to ensure the margin is not less than before and became bakras.


I think this govt is even more uncaring of self interests than any in th epast. they voted to be seen with US even when tehir requirments were nto cared for.
How stupid.

When UK one of the sponsors of the resolution is not even in the picture what is the need to make their stance open?

Aa bains mujhe maar!

The above article is psy-ops to people of Tamilnadu that GOI did not dilute any resolution!!!

So they are scared of Indian reaction.

By voting they have not satisfied anyone in TN and managed to upset SL and the US don't care for the resolution would have passed anyway!!!

Perfect losers on all fronts.
Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8220
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Gus »

sourab_c wrote:Tamil diaspora is part of India and its interests are not mutually exclusive to our national interests....
Thank you.

Just because of LTTE, the SL Tamils cannot be let to their own fate, with no care or concern from Indians and Indian tamils. This is not in some far off land with some vague ties. This is next door with a lot of ties for lot of people.

Indian tamils asking for a separate tamil eelam are in cloud cuckoo land. There is no reason to take that as a serious demand. It is to be seen as 'equal rights in a federation type setup with some local autonomy' and India would be better off, and Sri Lanka as well, if they work towards this type of setup so this decades long bad blood is put behind and everybody moves ahead.
Yayavar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4833
Joined: 06 Jun 2008 10:55

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Yayavar »

Gus, Sourab: Then there should be support for non-LTTE and not driven by LTTE remnants and supporters. It is suspect due to it. See the note from Ramana above.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

If it was not sad it would be funny. India votes no, and MuKa thatha is still unhappy because the amendments he suggested did not make it through. Did he think US will incorporate them? US said it was too late to make the changes. JJ is not happy either. So why did India vote the way it did? It pisses off Srilanka, MuKa and JJ. Not to mention the Sinhalese population - who seem to have descended on FirstPost.com website. MuKa is crazy hateful old man. Has he suggested bilateral talks?

The tamilian directors like Maniratnam, Seeman ityadi whose hearts are filled with sorrow, why don't they make solid good documentaries? SL diaspora will fund them? Then tamilians do not have to depend on Europeans, no? These dudes, get to the streets to whip emotions, how about back it with on the ground footage, interviews, situations, photos ityadi? Why no National Geographic type documentation? Why leave the documentation to the Sinhalese and European.

Again, in all the innocent people bear the sorrow and horror, while the elites fight with their own agenda. This is universal in nature.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32665
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by chetak »

Truth about Tigers
The humanitarian crisis that befell hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils trapped in a tiny strip of land in the island's north in the closing days of the 2009 military operation to defeat the LTTE is at the centre of the controversy over the resolution sponsored by the US at the UN Human Rights Council. The number of innocent people killed in that final stretch of the 26-year-old civil war is as yet difficult to determine. And Colombo's effort to move on from that historic moment of re-establishing its writ across the country has left much to be desired. This is unfortunate. Colombo's failure to take stock of Sri Lanka's challenge in an inclusive and participatory manner has given succour to the LTTE's long project of casting its militancy as a fight between the Sri Lankan government and the ethnic Tamil population.

Nothing could be farther from the facts. The back story to the crisis in Sri Lanka is made up of mis-steps by assorted players, going back to the ill-advised language policy, but the LTTE's central role in wreaking damage to the ethnic and political fabric of the country must not be forgotten. The Tigers were unforgivingly brutal in holding their sway as the sole spokespersons of Sri Lankan Tamils, and they made the point not by winning the argument, but by slaying each and every person who could challenge them politically. They assassinated India's prime minister and Sri Lanka's president, thereby fomenting the danger of a backlash that they could use to their advantage. They killed, almost to the last, any Tamil politician who could have been part of an inclusive political process to take Sri Lanka forward. Put simply, a peaceful settlement was never part of the LTTE's agenda, for peace — an atmosphere conducive for the island's Tamils to move on from a state of resentment and victimhood — would have fostered political challenges to its domination.

Certainly, there can be no moral equivalence in the conduct of a government and a terrorist organisation like the LTTE. But equally, with Sri Lanka becoming the subject of such reflexive and irresponsible politics in India, as it has today, there must be a deeper, more nuanced reckoning of what it is that made that country's ethnic relations so fraught.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14380
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

It seems UPA votes based on EU, American interests and not on Indian Interests.
thusitha
BRFite
Posts: 208
Joined: 24 Apr 2009 14:54

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by thusitha »

Carl
Sri Lanka’s Muslim minority is increasingly finding itself the target of Sinhala-Buddhist nationalists: a campaign against halal, attacks on mosques, boycott of their businesses, hate speech, intimidation and threats. Many concerned social activists, researchers and commentators have attempted to grapple with current manifestations of this phenomenon with a view to shaping meaningful and effective responses by furthering our understanding of its socio-political and economic dimensions.

Gurus, a question: Is it possible that at this point Indian diplomacy has become so weak and feckless that if SL were to attempt another annexation of Maldives (and subsequent uprooting of Islamism there), GoI would only be able to stand and watch (and perhaps moralize for good effect)?
Seriously? Do you think you can control the Muslim's in India? Can even the U.S. control them? Neither can Sri Lankans. There is a serious move towards Fundamental Islam in Sri Lanka. If you go to North East you will feel it. This is not just worrying to Sinhalese, but would be worry some to Tamils. This is the cause of recent over reaction, which I think is totally unnecessary and had attracted too much bad press recently.

I am not aware Sri Lanka tried to Anex Maldives. As far as I can remember, LTTE attempted that.
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by alexis »

Damned if u vote damned if u dont!

What should have India done? abstain?

India has been doing that for ages in Bangladesh and Hindus have become nearly exterminated there. Now u want to turn a blind eye to genocide against Tamils in Sri Lanka?
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by alexis »

Aditya_V wrote:It seems UPA votes based on EU, American interests and not on Indian Interests.
Can you please define "Indian interests" here? is it in Indian interest that people of Indian diaspora are subjected to genocide? Do you support the attacks against Hindus in Bangladesh?

LTTE was a terrorist organisation. However tamils in Sri lanka are not!
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

alexis wrote:Damned if u vote damned if u dont!

What should have India done? abstain?

India has been doing that for ages in Bangladesh and Hindus have become nearly exterminated there. Now u want to turn a blind eye to genocide against Tamils in Sri Lanka?
India should have voted against the resolution. As is BD and as in Sri Lanka, India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums.

And can we get the genocide word a miss in case of SL. There is nothing happening there. Without getting into what happened during the war, two years back, is now over.

Why the needless issue on something that no one gave a damn about 2 years back?
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

^^^
If SL tamils are Indian diaspora so are SL Sinhanlese.

If BD Hindus are Indian diaspora so are BD muslims.

The religious polarization in BD != ethnic polarization in SL.
nvishal
BRFite
Posts: 992
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:03

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by nvishal »

ramana wrote:This means India voted not in national interests.
The seeds for the division of srilanka have already been sowed. The big part of the blame falls on the sinhalas themselves.
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by alexis »

Sanku wrote:^^^
If SL tamils are Indian diaspora so are SL Sinhanlese.

If BD Hindus are Indian diaspora so are BD muslims.

The religious polarization in BD != ethnic polarization in SL.
Ok. As per your definition, we should not intervene in either case. Nice.
alexis
BRFite
Posts: 469
Joined: 13 Oct 2004 22:14
Contact:

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by alexis »

Sanku wrote:
India should have voted against the resolution. As is BD and as in Sri Lanka, India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums.

And can we get the genocide word a miss in case of SL. There is nothing happening there. Without getting into what happened during the war, two years back, is now over.

Why the needless issue on something that no one gave a damn about 2 years back?
Indian parliament cant reach a consensus on what kind of intervention we should do and you expect India to intervene directly?
"India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums."

How can you influence directly thru multilateral forums? Isnt UN a mutilateral forum?
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

Sanku wrote:^^^
If SL tamils are Indian diaspora so are SL Sinhanlese.

If BD Hindus are Indian diaspora so are BD muslims.

The religious polarization in BD != ethnic polarization in SL.
Religious differences are part of problem. One cannot forget religion in these discussions.
SwamyG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16268
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 09:22

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by SwamyG »

http://hinduexistence.org/2013/03/20/ig ... l-victims/

This looks like he wrote this after reading BRF. Any way he blasts niticentral and Kanchan Gupta's position.
Javee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2377
Joined: 13 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: NJ

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Javee »

thusitha wrote:Seriously? Do you think you can control the Muslim's in India?
There lies your problem, why do you need to "control" muslims or tamils or hindus or martians?
Can even the U.S. control them? Neither can Sri Lankans. There is a serious move towards Fundamental Islam in Sri Lanka. If you go to North East you will feel it. This is not just worrying to Sinhalese, but would be worry some to Tamils. This is the cause of recent over reaction, which I think is totally unnecessary and had attracted too much bad press recently.
Seriously, you come up with weird answers. Last page you said if India votes against Srilanka then there will be "Tamil" ethnic issue in India, now on muslims, you are coining oft maligned word - Fundamental Islam. So you dont want to own up to problems and just point fingers on others. GoSL and Singhalese are perfect souls, looks like they cannot do anything wrong these days. Why is selling "halal" food a big deal for lankans anyway?
I am not aware Sri Lanka tried to Anex Maldives. As far as I can remember, LTTE attempted that.
It was not LTTE, but PLOTE.
Javee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2377
Joined: 13 Jan 2003 12:31
Location: NJ

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Javee »

Sanku wrote:India should have voted against the resolution. As is BD and as in Sri Lanka, India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums.
What influence? We squandered it all (political leverage), not because of this vote, but because of our self imposed isolation after 1991. We didn't give 2 hoots about Lankan tamils or their issues both from LTTE side and GoSL side. Now that GoSL thinks that they won the war, they are not going give an ear to Manmohan or Sonia. Regardless of India votes for or against, its all the same in the ground. "For" vote might get some additional tanks for Lanka IOC. :P
And can we get the genocide word a miss in case of SL. There is nothing happening there. Without getting into what happened during the war, two years back, is now over.
Stuck in technicality like Mu.Ka?? People are fighting politically and with arms because there is nothing happening there for them.
Why the needless issue on something that no one gave a damn about 2 years back?
This is the most pertinent question, although India should keep pushing GoSL to implement the promises given to GoI in 2009, but with limited influence that is not going to go anywhere. How do we nudge GoSL to fulfill the promises they made and the LLRC recommendations? Answer is wide open.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by RajeshA »

Javee ji,

too much of the Tamizh Eezham issue has been taken over by EvanJihadi interests. Unless these are not purged one cannot be sure that these interests are really in concomitant with those of India.
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

alexis wrote:
Sanku wrote:
India should have voted against the resolution. As is BD and as in Sri Lanka, India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums.

And can we get the genocide word a miss in case of SL. There is nothing happening there. Without getting into what happened during the war, two years back, is now over.

Why the needless issue on something that no one gave a damn about 2 years back?
Indian parliament cant reach a consensus on what kind of intervention we should do and you expect India to intervene directly?
"India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums."

How can you influence directly thru multilateral forums? Isnt UN a mutilateral forum?

That was a typo of course, I meant directly AND NOT through forums
Sanku
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12526
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 15:57
Location: Naaahhhh

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by Sanku »

Javee wrote:
Sanku wrote:India should have voted against the resolution. As is BD and as in Sri Lanka, India needs to exercise influence directly through multilateral forums.
What influence? We squandered it all (political leverage), not because of this vote, but because of our self imposed isolation after 1991. We didn't give 2 hoots about Lankan tamils or their issues both from LTTE side and GoSL side. Now that GoSL thinks that they won the war, they are not going give an ear to Manmohan or Sonia. Regardless of India votes for or against, its all the same in the ground. "For" vote might get some additional tanks for Lanka IOC. :P
That is not accurate, the last fight with LTTE was settled through primarily Indian help, and India has been involved in the process through and through.

Heck even if India did do what you say it did, just the very basic reason of having a huge power right next door ensures enough power for influence.
And can we get the genocide word a miss in case of SL. There is nothing happening there. Without getting into what happened during the war, two years back, is now over.
Stuck in technicality like Mu.Ka?? People are fighting politically and with arms because there is nothing happening there for them.
There is a special reason why Mu Ka wants the Genocide word and reasons some people are flogging it. So yes, the exact word used makes a lot of difference and is important.
Why the needless issue on something that no one gave a damn about 2 years back?
This is the most pertinent question, although India should keep pushing GoSL to implement the promises given to GoI in 2009, but with limited influence that is not going to go anywhere. How do we nudge GoSL to fulfill the promises they made and the LLRC recommendations? Answer is wide open.
I think it does not take too much, a set of economic persuasions points, coupled with buying of influence (tourism development say?) and also not taking any sides in public, will ensure a meeting of interests.

However the current GoI is completely incompetent, but that is not India's incompetence, a half competent GoI would have done a far better job.
svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4727
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Sri Lanka - News and Discussion

Post by svenkat »

http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/chairperson-s-mike-broken-rajya-sabha-session-ends-with-unruly-scenes-345712

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/shocking-scenes-of-violence-hits-rajya-sabha-as-aiadmk-mps-run-amok/1091954/
The DMK members also threatened that they will not allow Chowdhury to occupy the Chair in future. "You cannot treat us like animals," they shouted back.

DMK member Siva got so agitated that he required medical aid and an ambulance was called as a standby.
DMK/ADMK MPs outdoing each other befitting the legacy of kalaignar,'puratchi' nadigar,'puratchi' thalaivar,puratchi thalaivi,,latchiya nadigar et all.

Whether puratchi or not,nadigargal they are in public life.
Locked