Rights groups had displayed a "most unattractive attitude" when they refused to appear before the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), Minister of External Affairs Prof. G. L. Peiris said.

"It smacks of an attitude that is almost colonial, patronising and condescending, the assumption being that other people must step in because Sri Lankans are unable to chart a course for their own future," the Minister said addressing more than 100 international foreign policy experts at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London.

He stressed that the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, had said the LLRC “holds promise”, and said it was an issue of “profound regret” that the International Crisis Group and Amnesty International had declined to participate in the process.

Minister Peiris added the LLRC was based on similar reconciliation commissions in countries such as South Africa.

He urged rights groups and exiled Tamil organisations not to "begin with negative presumptions."

"Let us begin with something benign and optimistic, something which carries a message of hope and fortitude. Let us not assume all of this is going to fail, it is our fervent wish that we will succeed, that we must succeed," he said.

Minister Peiris also gave an insight into government plans for post-conflict reconstruction and development for all Sri Lankans.

He stated that terrorism had historically prevented Sri Lanka from fulfilling its economic potential. He said Sri Lanka now has an opportunity to build a “new reality”, which delivered investment, jobs and the doubling of per capita income (from $US2,000 per annum to $US4,000 per annum) by 2015. He said the danger now is that those who had failed to destroy Sri Lanka by military means are devoting their efforts to undermining it economically.

He said the military victory had been necessary, but said long-term peace and prosperity required political, cultural and social solutions. As part of this process, Professor Peiris said it was essential that a political space is created that allows for the emergence of a democratic, moderate Tamil leadership. He cited recent elections in the Eastern Province, and planned elections in the Northern Province, as evidence of the Sri Lankan Government’s commitment to this process.

The Minister pointed to recent achievements in reducing the number of IDPs to less than 20,000 in just 15 months; increased private-public sector partnerships to rebuild businesses in the north of the island; economic growth of more than 8%; and a revised electoral process from the local level upwards; as key steps in securing a brighter future for all Sri Lankans.

Professor Peiris said Sri Lanka faced an “economic onslaught” by Tamil extremists, who were seeking to damage the island’s economic outlook and deter foreign investment. He said allegations of human rights abuses by Sri Lanka were deliberately timed to inflict the maximum possible damage, such as the week preceding the European Union’s decision on GSP+ trade privileges. He criticised the media, including the Daily Telegraph and Channel 4, for giving prominence to unsubstantiated allegations.

Professor Peiris concluded by stressing that the Sri Lankan Government wishes to engage proactively and constructively abroad, both with the moderate and pragmatic elements of the Tamil Diaspora, and also with the international community, notably with “old friends”.

He also fielded a number of probing questions about the future of Sri Lanka from the floor.

Asked about the integration of Tamil minorities, Professor Peiris stressed that there were “no problems” with integrating Tamils in the diplomatic corps or educational establishment. He acknowledged that Tamil involvement in the police had been an issue, but said efforts were being made to actively recruit Tamil-speaking police recruits in the Eastern Province. Some 700 such recruits had been brought into the service since hostilities had ended.

On Diaspora issues, Professor Peiris said that large numbers of Sri Lankan citizens were returning to the island. He stressed that the United National High Commission for Refugees had concluded that it is now safe for expatriates to return, regardless of their ethnic background.

Challenged by a representative of Amnesty International to outline the Government’s position on the Witness Protection Bill, Professor Peiris said that the Government considered such a programme desirable. However, he stressed that Sri Lanka would not be dictated to by external actors, and would design a scheme which it considered appropriate for a Sri Lanka context. Professor Peiris said Amnesty International was driving a political agenda, and said the timing of its allegations had been deliberately designed to influence the European Union’s decision on GSP+. He said Amnesty International’s campaign had no impact on the Government, but risked damaging the economy and jeopardising the economic fortunes of ordinary Sri Lankans. The representative of Amnesty International denied the allegation, and said the organisation did not take a view on economic sanctions.

Responding to questions about Sri Lanka’s international relations, Professor Peiris said the country was benefiting from Chinese, Indian and Japanese investment in its infrastructure. However, he stressed that these relationships complemented, rather than replaced, Sri Lanka’s longstanding relations with Western states, including Britain. He said he had already held productive talks with UK Parliamentarians, and looked forward to meeting UK ministers during the remainder of his visit to Britain.