|
|
 |
 |
|||
The Sri Lankan Government rejected LTTE's demand for troop withdrawals in the Northern war zone prior to peace talks and reiterated its stance that it could only take place after a permanent political solution is reached. Ministry of Foreign Affairs also issued an official statement on Saturday denying that LTTE had communicated its demand via the Norwegian Government when the Sri Lankan Government initiated its role as facilitator. "The government states firmly that such a suggestion has not been made by the LTTE through the Norwegian Government as of now. Presently it is the considered view of the Sri Lankan Government, that such a progressive de-escalation is possible only if the proposed talks proceed successfully and the troop withdrawal could only take place after a permanent political solution is reached. It is the operative policy of the government to carry out its security requirements, causing minimum difficulty or dislocation to the population in all areas of the country. There is an on-going review of these measures by the authorities concerned and whatever easing that is possible, is carried out periodically. Such measures would become unnecessary, if the LTTE were to desist from attacking civilian areas or using civilians as shields in attacking other targets," the release stated. Political analysts and diplomatic circles have become confused over LTTE's official policy regarding peace talks after LTTE political advisor Anton Balasingham declared in his interview that the Tigers were "not interested in packages, accords, constitutional reforms". LTTE's deviation from their stance in favour of negotiations for political reforms ensuring greater autonomy has caused the Sri Lankan Government to wonder about LTTE's intentions with regard to peace talks. Ministry statement also said that "Mr. Balasingham's comment ridiculing constitutional reforms, which comes at a time when the government's efforts to reach a 'southern consensus' together with the UNP and the minority parties appears to be proceeding smoothly and purposefully, raises questions concerning the LTTE's sincerity and commitment to the peace process". The Foreign Ministry commenting on the recent interview given by Anton Balasingham to the London based "Tamil Guardian" said , "While much of what is contained in it amounts to bombastic exaggeration and 'sabre rattling', aimed at keeping up the morale of LTTE sympathisers overseas, there are three points which cannot be allowed to pass unchallenged". The release says: 1. Mr. Balasingham is quoted as calling for the "removal of a complex set of repressive conditions imposed by the UNP and PA governments on the Tamil people for the last ten years. This repressive policy manifests in the form of bans, embargoes, restrictions and prohibitions causing monumental existential problems seriously undermining the socio-economic and cultural life of our people. Though they are essentially socio-economic conditions of internal repression, the magnitude of the problem has been aggravated by the escalation of war, by military aggression and occupation of Tamil areas which displaced a million people and condemned them to a condition of destitution, de-humanisation and despair. What the LTTE wants is the removal of these repressive conditions which the UNP and PA has imposed on our people as a collective punishment" The LTTE's claim to be the sole representative of the Tamil people is totally unfounded in fact. It is a mere assertion that gains no credibility whatsoever from repetition. It is worthy of note that of the approximately 2.4 million Sri Lankan Tamil population, nearly one third live outside Sri Lanka, another near one third live side by side with the Sinhala people in predominantly Sinhalese majority areas which lie outside the temporarily merged North-Eastern Province. Of the remaining one third, more than 75% live in the areas under the effective protection of the Sri Lankan security forces. It would be recalled that of the civilians who were forced by the LTTE to leave Jaffna and go to the Vanni region in December, 1995, in the face of the Sri Lanka Army's advance into Jaffna, more than two thirds chose of their own free will to return to Jaffna immediately after its liberation, and are presently living there under the newly elected local administration and the protection of the Sri Lankan security forces. As for the security measures that have come into operation in all parts of the country, which admittedly cause difficulty to all sections of the population, it must be appreciated that these measures have been necessitated in the face of a spiral of ruthless killings by the LTTE both in the North as well as in the South. The Government takes the view that it has no moral right to abdicate its responsibility of protecting its people and particularly the people of Jaffna, who returned and remained there despite much hardship largely caused by the acts of wanton destruction and disruption by the LTTE. The security forces operating in the predominantly Tamil areas, particularly Jaffna, have shown a high degree of professionalism in protecting the people despite grave provocation by the LTTE, while at the same time safeguarding the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. While the Government rejects Mr. Balasingham's suggestion that 'repressive conditions' are being imposed on the Tamil people, it wishes to reiterate that the prevailing security measures could not be dismantled, as long as the LTTE continues on its path of violence and destruction. 2. Mr. Balasingham is also quoted as saying "Since the removal of these repressive conditions is inextricably linked to the State's policy of war, we suggest a practical program of disengagement, of cessation of hostilities or cease-fire under international monitoring and re-allocation of troops to barracks to end military occupation. If the government wants to keep the troops in Tamil areas, they can do so until a final settlement is reached to the Tamil national question. We are not against the presence of troops but opposed to the occupation of troops in civilian habitations, in schools, in colleges of education, in holy temples, in cultural centres and in every street corner turning the Tamil towns into open prisons and causing tension and turmoil in Tamil civilian life." The Government states firmly that such a suggestion has not been made by the LTTE through the Norwegian Government as of now. Presently it is the considered view of the Sri Lanka Government, that such a progressive de-escalation is possible only if the proposed talks proceed successfully and the troop withdrawal could only take place after a permanent political solution is reached. It is the operative policy of the Government to carry out its security requirements, causing minimum difficulty or dislocation to the population in all areas of the country. There is an on-going review of these measures by the authorities concerned and whatever easing that is possible, is carried out periodically. Such measures would become unnecessary, if the LTTE were to desist from attacking civilian areas or using civilians as shields in attacking other targets. 3. Mr. Balasingham is further quoted as saying: "Our people want urgent and immediate solution to these pressing problems. They are not interested in packages, accords, constitutional reforms which seek structural changes in policy but do not reflect the harsh realities of their day to day existence." This
is a strange statement coming from a person who claims to be the exclusive
interlocutor of the LTTE, relating to the Norwegian Government facilitated
effort to resume talks between the Sri Lanka Government and the LTTE,
aimed at bringing about a negotiated settlement to the ethnic problem in
Sri Lanka. It is the firm belief of the Sri Lanka Government that the
large majority of all its citizens desire an honourable peace and the
Government is firmly committed to work towards this objective, despite all
the obstacles placed in its way. It is this spirit, that notwithstanding
the LTTE's unreliability in relation to previous peace efforts, the Indian
mediation efforts in 1987, the Premadasa-LTTE talks in 1990 and the
Kumaratunga-Prabhakaran exchanges where in fact the LTTE repudiated a
four-month old cessation of hostilities that was operative at the time,
and also not being affected by the brutal suicide attack on herself,
President Kumaratunga sought to resume a dialogue with the LTTE and
requested the Norwegian Government to act as a facilitator. It has been
made known by the Norwegian Government that its action was also pursuant
to "a wish from the LTTE'. In such a context, Mr. Balasingham's
comment ridiculing "constitutional reforms", which comes at a
time when the Government's effects to reach a 'southern consensus'
together with the UNP and the minority parties appears to be proceeding
smoothly and purposefully, raises questions concerning the LTTE's
sincerity and commitment to the peace process. The Government hopes that
in the interest of all citizens of Sri Lanka, including the 'Tamil
People', whom Mr. Balasingham claims to be speaking for, his statement
does not represent a deviation of purpose by the LTTE in the face of the
pressure to settle for an honourable peace.
|
|
Contact Information: Send
mail to