Bharat Rakshak

If the pressure being brought to bear by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) and other Tamil political parties and groups on the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government to take a strong stand against Sri Lanka in the Human Rights Council (HRC) is aimed at helping the Tamil minority in that country, it is unlikely to achieve that objective.

In fact, it is quite likely to have the opposite effect of painting Sri Lankan Tamils as a fifth column for Tamil nationalist or Eelamist designs emanating from Tamil Nadu, and increasing the political polarisation in that country.

This is not to say that the Rajapaksa government is blameless in the way it has treated the violations of human rights against Tamil civilians by Sri Lankan forces and of international laws of conduct by soldiers in combat. Its cavalier attitude to reports of civilian casualties during the war, and towards post-war ethnic reconciliation also does it no credit.

Where Sri Lanka erred

It would have been the easiest thing for President Mahinda Rajapaksa to be magnanimous in victory. Admitting in 2009 that Tamil civilians had been killed in the fighting; apologising for those killings; immediately investigating reports of violations by the Sri Lankan Army of the No Fire Zone and probing the cases of missing people. This would have been the most politically graceful, as well as effortless, way forward.

Mr. Rajapaksa could have even gone as far as make a national apology for the 1983 anti-Tamil riots, the turning point of the conflict in Sri Lanka, and he would have gone down in history as a different sort of leader, as a statesman. Instead, he allowed narrow triumphalism to set the national agenda, to the point where resolving the Tamil question is now seen by Sinhala nationalists as unnecessary. Since the end of the war, revisionists have ensured that the Sinhalese majority thinks of the conflict only as a series of atrocities committed by the LTTE, and the LTTE as a group created by India, while the Sri Lankan military remains stationed all across northern Sri Lanka, as if in readiness for another war.

Devolution

The government’s decision to set up a parliamentary committee to find a political solution to Tamil aspirations is hardly adequate, especially as reports by previous committees have been unceremoniously shelved. From the pronouncements of those close to Mr. Rajapaksa, the future of what little devolution now exists in Sri Lanka is uncertain. By the time the much-delayed elections to the Tamil-dominated Northern Province are held, as stated by him in September this year, it is not clear how much power will be devolved.

The protests

So it will not be wrong to say that Sri Lanka’s obstinate reluctance to deal with its national question is squarely to blame for the churning in Tamil Nadu today. But protests in Tamil Nadu by political parties and students are hardly going to push Colombo to take the right steps. Indeed, all this only makes it easier for the Sri Lankan government to dismiss any Indian effort to make it do the right thing as inspired by the “Tamil Nadu factor,” and therefore, not take it seriously.

Even Sri Lankan Tamils are not convinced that Dravidian political parties take up their cause for anything other than their own political gains. The half-day Marina hunger strike by DMK leader M. Karunanidhi in the closing stages of the war against the LTTE in 2009, still evokes much derisive laughter among Sri Lankan Tamils, and has also gone down as a lasting symbol of the cynical use that Tamil Nadu parties make of the Eelam Tamil cause.

Sri Lankan Tamils also know more than anyone else that such shows by Tamil Nadu politicians only heighten the siege mentality of the Sinhalese, who have always regarded Tamil Nadu with suspicion, and the island’s once secessionist Tamil politics and militancy as not just influenced, but directed by Tamil leaders in the southern Indian state.

View on resolutions

Any move by New Delhi to strengthen the U.S-sponsored resolution before the HRC at the behest of the DMK is hardly going to persuade Sri Lanka to do what is right and just. If the Rajapaksa regime did not feel pushed by the 2012 resolution, in many ways the real wake-up call, it is hardly worried by the 2013 one.

As India did not so long ago, Sri Lanka views resolutions against it in the HRC as driven by lobbies with agendas against the country, especially when sponsored by a country accused of rights violations across the globe, and is able to find enough political support within for this view. In any case, the HRC resolutions are not binding.

How then to get Sri Lanka to take the right steps towards national reconciliation? The answer lies in India, but it is located in New Delhi, not in Chennai. On Tuesday, UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi took the extraordinary step at the Congress Parliamentary Party meeting, of expressing her party’s concern for Sri Lankan Tamils.

“The plight of Tamils in Sri Lanka is close to our hearts. Our support for equal rights and equal protection of the laws to them has been unwavering since the days of Indiraji and Rajivji.

“We are most pained at the manner in which their legitimate political rights continue to be denied to them. We are anguished by reports of unspeakable atrocities on innocent civilians and children, especially during the last days of the conflict in 2009,” she said.

This should have been New Delhi’s line from the start, one that it should have used in hard-edged, but quiet diplomacy with Sri Lanka.

But it allowed itself to be scared by the “China card,” real or not, being waved at it by Sri Lanka, and by our own strategic thinkers. New Delhi does itself and Sri Lankan Tamils a big disfavour by shaking the dust off its Sri Lanka policy from March to March, HRC session to HRC session, crisis to crisis for the UPA coalition from its Tamil Nadu partner, instead of framing one that is confident, non-reactive and long term.

Mrs Gandhi’s statement on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue was the strongest from any Indian leader in more than two decades. And it is all the more remarkable for one who has suffered personal loss at the hands of the LTTE. Unfortunately, it will not carry the moral edge that it should, likely as it is to be seen as nothing more than a plunge by the Congress leader into Tamil Nadu’s competitive Eelamist politics, a move to save her party from a total eclipse in the State, made under the assumption that this is an issue that will sway voters one year from now.

12:32 Shrieking DMK MP faints in RS over Lanka Tamils: DMK member Vasanthi Stanley faints in Rajya Sabha while exercising her vocal chords over the Sri Lankan Tamils issue.

SSridhar wrote:A Solidarity Sri Lankan Tamils can do Without - Nirupama Subramanian, The Hindu

How then to get Sri Lanka to take the right steps towards national reconciliation? The answer lies in India, but it is located in New Delhi, not in Chennai. ....
...This should have been New Delhi’s line from the start, one that it should have used in hard-edged, but quiet diplomacy with Sri Lanka.

But it allowed itself to be scared by the “China card,” real or not, being waved at it by Sri Lanka, and by our own strategic thinkers. New Delhi does itself and Sri Lankan Tamils a big disfavour by shaking the dust off its Sri Lanka policy from March to March, HRC session to HRC session, crisis to crisis for the UPA coalition from its Tamil Nadu partner, instead of framing one that is confident, non-reactive and long term.

Mrs Gandhi’s statement on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue was the strongest from any Indian leader in more than two decades. And it is all the more remarkable for one who has suffered personal loss at the hands of the LTTE. Unfortunately, it will not carry the moral edge that it should, likely as it is to be seen as nothing more than a plunge by the Congress leader into Tamil Nadu’s competitive Eelamist politics, a move to save her party from a total eclipse in the State, made under the assumption that this is an issue that will sway voters one year from now.

Javee wrote: Channel 4 has successfully channeled the pent up anger in public minds. It is a bonanza for all the political parties

Gus wrote:IMO, it was that pic of that boy that started this new wave of outrage/protests etc. People have an inherent sense of fairness and many felt it was not fair. Most people I know were ok with prabhakaran killed. He was a killer and SL took him out..no issues (not talking about the Vaiko types).

By the way, both the DMK and the local Congress are celebrating this 'break up' with crackers and assorted ruckus in Arivalayam and Sathyamoorthy Bhavan.

Gus wrote:

Javee wrote: Channel 4 has successfully channeled the pent up anger in public minds. It is a bonanza for all the political parties

IMO, it was that pic of that boy that started this new wave of outrage/protests etc. People have an inherent sense of fairness and many felt it was not fair. Most people I know were ok with prabhakaran killed. He was a killer and SL took him out..no issues (not talking about the Vaiko types).

rohitvats wrote:I have no bloody idea what good is going to come to SL Tamils from the UN Resolution or by Indian voting against SL in the same resolution. It is nothing but a ploy to get SL to toe the western line championed by the likes of UK. No body gives a flying fvck for the SL Tamils...they never did. All they are looking for is to further their narrow agendas in the island nation. And here we have Indians flagellating themselves and asking GOI to vote against SL. Fat load of good is going to do to SL Tamils or India.

thusitha wrote:I think this is the last thing India should try to do. In the past we weren't that aware about what is happening around the world. That has changed quite a bit now. Sri Lankan's are smarter.

thusitha wrote:Only thing you should try to do is allow us to develop

thusitha wrote:I believe Sri lanka would become a multicultural society.

thusitha wrote:Indian’s should learn to live with Chinese, the same way as U.S. lives with Russia.

thusitha wrote:Need to stop thinking with the Cold war era mind set. If Chinese, Indians and Malays can work together in Singapore, so can you work in Sri Lanka.

thusitha wrote:I think you are overly worried about Sri Lanka-China connection. We are trying to build a nation here. So we take help from where ever we can. I am sure Sri Lanka would not be a partisan nation, either to India or China

Gus wrote: GoI is no less idiotic than TN politicos reg SL.

....
Perhaps equally disturbing is evidence of the Rajapaksas’ authoritarian rule getting entrenched, as is argued in a new report by the International Crisis Group. And the violent crimes continue. A new report by Human Rights Watch, an activist group, released on February 26th, publishes testimony from victims, doctors and others, who describe how Sri Lanka’s security forces—its army, police, intelligence agents—use arbitrary detention, violence, torture and rape against Tamil suspects.

It documents 75 cases—including 31 from 2010 to late last year—of Tamil men and women (including two who had been forcibly deported from Britain to Sri Lanka) who were detained, violently interrogated, threatened with execution, raped, burned with cigarettes, tortured and forced to sign confessions of supporting the former rebel army. Many were snatched by plainclothes figures travelling in white vans, either in the capital, Colombo, or in northern Sri Lanka. It makes for harrowing, convincing reading. The group says it has evidence such practices have continued in the past few months.

Sri Lanka’s official response is angry denial. A version of the UN resolution is doing the rounds in Colombo. The Rajapaksa government may fail to block it, and prefers to talk up its diplomatic ties with China. In any case, foreign criticism has limited impact: domestic critics among the press, activist groups, religious bodies and unions look ever more cowed; the parliamentary opposition is all but silent. Among the Sinhalese majority, the Rajapaksas remain popular for winning the war and delivering strong economic growth. They portray foreign criticism as an international conspiracy to smear Sri Lanka’s reputation.

Thus, one can expect no decisive change. Once the UN has had its vote, the next clash is likely to concern a summit of Commonwealth leaders in November, which is due to be held in Colombo. Various countries, perhaps including India, where local Tamil political parties can influence national policy, may demand better treatment for Sri Lanka’s Tamils (and other domestic opposition) ahead of that meeting. For the Rajapaksa family, the summit is supposed to be a moment of international glory. In the face of clear evidence of atrocities and abuse, that looks ever more tainted.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2 ... ts-critics

Javee wrote:

....
Perhaps equally disturbing is evidence of the Rajapaksas’ authoritarian rule getting entrenched, as is argued in a new report by the International Crisis Group. And the violent crimes continue. A new report by Human Rights Watch, an activist group, released on February 26th, publishes testimony from victims, doctors and others, who describe how Sri Lanka’s security forces—its army, police, intelligence agents—use arbitrary detention, violence, torture and rape against Tamil suspects.

It documents 75 cases—including 31 from 2010 to late last year—of Tamil men and women (including two who had been forcibly deported from Britain to Sri Lanka) who were detained, violently interrogated, threatened with execution, raped, burned with cigarettes, tortured and forced to sign confessions of supporting the former rebel army. Many were snatched by plainclothes figures travelling in white vans, either in the capital, Colombo, or in northern Sri Lanka. It makes for harrowing, convincing reading. The group says it has evidence such practices have continued in the past few months.

Sri Lanka’s official response is angry denial. A version of the UN resolution is doing the rounds in Colombo. The Rajapaksa government may fail to block it, and prefers to talk up its diplomatic ties with China. In any case, foreign criticism has limited impact: domestic critics among the press, activist groups, religious bodies and unions look ever more cowed; the parliamentary opposition is all but silent. Among the Sinhalese majority, the Rajapaksas remain popular for winning the war and delivering strong economic growth. They portray foreign criticism as an international conspiracy to smear Sri Lanka’s reputation.

Thus, one can expect no decisive change. Once the UN has had its vote, the next clash is likely to concern a summit of Commonwealth leaders in November, which is due to be held in Colombo. Various countries, perhaps including India, where local Tamil political parties can influence national policy, may demand better treatment for Sri Lanka’s Tamils (and other domestic opposition) ahead of that meeting. For the Rajapaksa family, the summit is supposed to be a moment of international glory. In the face of clear evidence of atrocities and abuse, that looks ever more tainted.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2 ... ts-critics

As said here before, this resolution too little, too late. It may give the Pakse's a black eye, but its not going to knock them down. It may actually up his support among the Singhalese. They are already spinning the story that the entire world is out there to get them.

chetak wrote: English speaking spokespersons are suddenly and freely available to comment lucidly on the DDM TV channels. This was not so earlier.
It's the same familiar orchestrated script that regularly plays out in cashmere.

FOR EELAM
Since Sinhala chauvinism won’t accommodate the Tamils, they deserve a separate state.
By N.V. Subramanian (20 March 2013)


New Delhi: India’s Sri Lanka policy is in a mess because in the dispute between the Tamils and the Sinhalese, it has chosen to go against the historical course which clearly favours a separate nation-state of Tamil Eelam. (This is an objective assessment and bears no link to this writer’s Tamilian background.) Eelam as and when it is formed will have no impact on the territorial integrity of India and must essentially be viewed in the same manner as the breakup of the Soviet Union after the Cold War.

Till Mrs Indira Gandhi was alive, she positioned India as a mediator in the ethnic dispute in the island nation. Her policy was crafted by the redoubtable diplomat and scholar, G.Parthasarthy, and it constituted some of the best forward diplomacy of its time, innovative, stirring and original. China had not risen to be India’s strategic competitor and encircler in the Indian Ocean as now but the United States was viewed with much suspicion and Pakistan remained inimical. The Cold War was at its peak.

Compelled to increment India’s involvement -- which is the downside of all mediation after a point -- Mrs Gandhi authorized the military training of the Tamil Tigers and other militant groups. Since she had succeeded by similarly training the Mukti Bahini to create Bangladesh and was overly indulgent to Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale to counter the Akalis in Punjab, she did not pause to consider the dangers of fanning the Tamil flames. She fell to Khalistani assassins and her son Rajiv by a quirk of fate to a Tamil suicide bomber.

Rather than cynically exploit the civil war in Sri Lanka, Mrs Gandhi should have pushed for a lasting solution, which can only be a separate Tamil state of Eelam. Granted such a decision was too early in the game, and Mrs Gandhi had genuine fears about a separate Tamil nation-state’s adverse impact on India and Tamil Nadu, which at least till the 1960s showed fissiparous tendencies. But how did she expect to control the Tamil groups she was militarily training or hope that they would follow her dictates and stop short of demanding a separate nation? They didn’t, as later events, and the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi, showed.

Rajiv Gandhi did not have the benefit of brilliance advisors like the old GP, as G.Parthasarthy was affectionately called in diplomatic circles; he had an army chief, General K.Sundarji, who thought in terms of obliterating the Tamil groups, which can’t have been India’s sensible intention; and there were the derring-do types in the foreign office, including the Indian high commissioner in Sri Lanka, J.N.Dixit, who spoke and acted irrationally most of the time. The result of all this was the second disastrous decision to deploy the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka, which, contrary to its nomenclature, turned against one party in the dispute, namely the Tamils, who it was meant to protect in the first place.

When geography separates and splits one community, any shared loyalty cannot be taken as a given. It is not axiomatic, in this case, that the Tamils in Sri Lanka would or will support the Tamilians in Tamil Nadu and by extension the Indian state on every count. Even if a Tamil Eelam comes about in the future -- as this writer intuits -- it does not automatically follow that India will have a winning hand there forever and till eternity. International politics does not work that way. Seeing the context and keeping within it, one must work for small gains, and see dramatic breakthroughs as a bonanza, nothing more, nothing less.

India, unfortunately, did not approach the Sri Lanka crisis step-by-incremental-step, and the consequence is the mess today. The third blunder after the military training of militant groups and the Indian Peace Keeping Force’s deployment in the island was the decision to support Sri Lanka in its all-out war against the Tamil Tigers lead by V.Prabhakaran. China gave full war aid to the Sinhala military and India, led by non-thinkers in Delhi, pitched on the side of the Sinhalese and the Chinese against the Tamils. The Tamils are your insurance against the chauvinistic Sinhala state turning against you in alliance with China, and that insurance policy has been set on fire. Of course the Sinhala government did not stop at killing Prabhakaran; it butchered masses of Tamil non-combatants and murdered Prabhakaran’s young son. When Delhi forces its attention away from the distractions of domestic politics to reappraise its Sri Lanka policy, the Sinhalese government plays the China card, real or imaginary. This is no way to manage and conduct international politics.

Unfortunately, by its deviousness and venality, the United Progressive Alliance regime has destroyed domestic political consensus to a degree that India cannot take a united stand on foreign concerns. But that has to be overcome, and this is not a luxury that can await a functioning post-2014 non-United Progressive Alliance government. Tamil Nadu’s political parties, chiefly the AIADMK and the DMK, must be advised to temper their mutual competition on the Tamil issue, and assist the Centre in formulating a sensible and doable Sri Lanka policy. And this, to this writer’s mind, is accepting the inevitability and finality of an independent state of Tamil Eelam and doing all that is strategically necessary to bring it to fruition. Essentially, this must be an Indian project, because Sri Lanka lies in India’s backyard, and the world community could be involved later.

Tamil Eelam will be a pragmatic and just solution to the continuing ethnic tragedy in Sri Lanka

Javee wrote:

chetak wrote: English speaking spokespersons are suddenly and freely available to comment lucidly on the DDM TV channels. This was not so earlier.
It's the same familiar orchestrated script that regularly plays out in cashmere.

Unlike cashmere, here the protesters are students many from engineering colleges and better arts & science colleges. It would be naive to think the students at this day and age cannot make a decent placard or speak in English.

DMK president M Karunanidhi said Wednesday that his party quit the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) and the government after realizing that India helped to dilute the US resolution.

Karunanidhi said chief minister J Jayalalithaa and reports in a section of media had implied he had confined his demand to just passing a resolution in Parliament incorporating amendments suggested to the US-backed resolution, which he said was "condemnable."

He recalled his party had demanded that an amendment be made to declare that genocide and war crimes had been committed and inflicted on Eelam Tamils by the Sri Lankan Army and administrators and an independent international commission of investigation be established in a time bound manner, which should be adopted as a resolution in Parliament.

"Our request and desire is that this should also be moved in the UNHRC as part of the US resolution. But the demand for international investigation into war crimes is not mentioned in the resolution and instead it has been said that the Sri Lankan government should lead a probe.

"In this way, the US resolution has been diluted to a large extent. The watering down has been done on the basis of India whole-heartedly accepting and appreciating a report tabled by the Lankan government at UNHRC," he said, adding rights body Amnesty International had also accused India of diluting the resolution.

Further, DMK's suggested amendments were not considered fully and therefore at this juncture, the party had announced its stand of pulling out of UPA, he said.
A vote is coming up at the 47-member UNHRC pulling up Sri Lanka for military excesses during the final stages of the war that vanquished the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

Last year, India had played a similar role even as it voted against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC.

Chidambaram said India intends to move amendments to the US resolution at the UNHRC and that the government was also talking to political parties over a resolution on Sri Lanka to be moved in Parliament.

Colombo has repeatedly denied killing Tamil civilians.

Chidambaram said the government had Tuesday finalised amendments to the draft resolution at Geneva.

"We will also continue to consult political parties on bringing a resolution to be adopted by Parliament," he said.

The statement said India's permanent representative to the UNHRC was in New Delhi for consultations.

It denied media reports that India had worked with the US to dilute the text of the draft UNHRC resolution.
Chidambaram, however, said the proposed resolution in Parliament was not linked to the withdrawal of support by the DMK.

He reiterated that the government was stable -- despite the withdrawal of support by the DMK that has 18 members in the Lok Sabha.

Information and broadcasting minister Manish Tewari said the government had to be sensitive to the feelings of the people of a state.

The reference was to the unending street protests in Tamil Nadu demanding that India should take a hard line vis-a-vis Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka has denied that its forces committed war crimes during the decades-long conflict with Tamil separatists in the north and east of the island, which ended with an military onslaught in early 2009.

International rights groups estimate that 40,000 civilians died in the final months of fighting.

India, home to millions of Tamils who share links with their counterparts in Sri Lanka, risks a further worsening in relations with Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse who has resisted any foreign interference.

Sri Lanka on Wednesday warned pilgrims against travelling to Tamil Nadu, a day after lodging a formal protest with New Delhi over repeated physical attacks against visiting Sri Lankans.

Dozens of Buddhists monks demonstrated outside the Indian embassy in Colombo for a second straight day on Wednesday. India has postponed scheduled defence cooperation talks this month, officials said.

In another move likely to deepen the discord, Chidambaram said the government was consulting other parties about a Parliamentary resolution which would also call on Sri Lanka to investigate the alleged war crimes.

Leader of the ruling Congress party, Sonia Gandhi, said Tuesday that India was "most pained" that Tamils in Sri Lanka were being denied their rights and New Delhi was "anguished by reports of unspeakable atrocities".

Sri Lanka's top general, who led the campaign against the Tamil Tiger rebels, said Tuesday the government should accept an investigation but he rejected any suggestion of genocide.

"Some people have questions. Some people have doubts. Some people want to know what happened," Sarath Fonseka, who is now a top opposition figure, told the Foreign Correspondents' Association.

"We will have to justify the actions taken by us. I am ready to answer anyone. I am ready to clarify any doubts."Raising its pitch on the Lankan Tamils issue, DMK on Wednesday charged that the US-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka at UNHRC was diluted on the basis of India's "wholehearted acceptance and appreciation" of a report tabled by Colombo at the UN body.

India will move amendments to the UN resolution against Sri Lanka at Geneva later this week, the government said today. Senior ministers also confirmed that they are working on support for a parliamentary resolution that will ask for an independent inquiry into alleged atrocities against Sri Lankan Tamils. "India's position has always been that UN should adopt a strong resolution to goad Sri Lanka to accept an independent investigation," said Finance Minister P Chidambaram on the amendments India will seek in Geneva.

The main opposition party, the BJP, has so far refused to support the resolution, arguing that it will amount to interference and unwarranted commentary on another country's affairs.

Javee wrote:Mu.Ka trying the best he can. Unfortunately, voters are intelligent these days and they have not forgotten the half a day stunt he did when the war was on. Pretty interesting that he is ready to sacrifice his daughter for the sake of voter brownie points, but then knowing him, this does not come as a surprise.

Edit: Thatha has said they will not get in to a coalition with congress ever again. Mu.Ka is looking more like Aiyya Ramadoss

thusitha wrote:Couple of years back when I mentioned that you have a Tamil problem (Tamil Eelam), people in the forum totally reject that Idea. The Sri Lankan Tamils have perfected the art of Propaganda, and are far ahead than Tamil Nadu Tamilians. By being silent in the Sri Lankan situation and allowing for so much protest and media coverage, what you are doing is making a huge problem for the Indian nation. You are giving the hope of an Tamil nation (Either in Sri lanka or in India), and making the young generation want a an Independent nation. Not sure where this will end now. These days with social media thinks can get out of hand very quickly.

NEW DELHI: The all-party meeting convened by government to explore the possibility of Parliament adopting a resolution against Sri Lanka on Wednesday night saw most parties opposing such a move, leaving no scope for it.

At the 90-minute meeting, only DMK and AIADMK supported the idea of bringing a resolution.

Sources said as most of the parties were not in favour, the idea is as good as given up.

Samajwadi Party, which supports the government from outside, said Sri Lanka is a friendly country and the Indian Parliament should not pass a resolution against it.

"We are with Lankan Tamils but there is no need for a resolution by Parliament as Lanka is the only country which stood with us during the 1962 China war.

"We have recently rejected Pakistan parliament resolution on Afzal Guru. How can we do the same to a friendly neighbour. At the UNHCR, India should do what is in the national interest and interst of Tamils of Lanka," said SP leader Rewati Raman Singh while emerging from the meeting convened by parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath.

Leader of opposition Sushma Swaraj questioned why all parties had been called for the meeting to discuss an issue which strictly is between the government and DMK.

DMK, which withdrew from the government yesterday, had demanded that government should get a resolution passed by Parliament against Sri Lanka.

Swaraj said the government had told the opposition that it wanted to hold the meeting to end the impasse in Parliament over Sri Lanka.

"We had never created the impasse. The impasse is between government and DMK and it is for them to sit together and resolve it," she said.

chaanakya wrote:
"We are with Lankan Tamils but there is no need for a resolution by Parliament as Lanka is the only country which stood with us during the 1962 China war.

Sanku wrote:

chaanakya wrote:
"We are with Lankan Tamils but there is no need for a resolution by Parliament as Lanka is the only country which stood with us during the 1962 China war.

Whats this bit? Very very compelling logic. (not sarcastically)

vina wrote:I always maintained here that the SL Govt won the war against LTTE, but lost the peace . T. Their war aims and idiocy sounds more Paki (for want of another word), in terms of dumbness and self destructiveness than anything else. Their entire outlook was not to win a just peace, but enforce the peace of the grave That is simply not sustainable, but has only kicked the can down the road.

Mark my words. This will come back within a generation and will come roaring back and burst forth like a volcano with accompanying tsunami (sort of like the krakatoa incident) . The entire world will be against the Sri Lankans then, with zero sympathy from anyone. An incident like the 1983 anti Tamil pogrom organized by the govt using the thuggish SL Buddhist clergy and associated lumpens will the last straw. That is brewing as well, as seen by the Taliban like tendencies there of the SL Buddhists of trying to create a "Buddhist State" or whatever (there was a news item on the BBC about how a Brit with a Buddha tattoo was harried and sent back, I thought these kind of "Prophet veneration" was a purely Islamic phenomenon, the parallels are uncanny) and the furore against halal markings etc. Any setback to their fascist fundamentalist project will result in mass violence now by the lumpens, just like 1983 and the previous riots.

The international community and particularly India will have no option but to intervene then and that will be the end of SL as a united political entity. SL needs to do the right thing to preserve it's unity and integrity and created a united peaceful country. It is their choice, but Rajapakse and co seem just too warped and frankly dumb to do the right thing, not to mention the Buddhist clergy and associated Sinhala extremist nutcases ,who anyway seem nuttier than fruitcakes.

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.

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?

For a start how about treating tamilians as a regular citizens, huh?

RajeshA
I can well imagine this painting of Sinhalese Buddhism as extremist variety or as turning extremist (aka Paki) a well-coordinated plan!

All parties in India and Sri Lanka are being played!