|
|
|
 |
 |
|||
|
|
A month after the tsunami wrecked two-thirds of Sri Lanka's coastal areas, its Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lakshman Kadirgamar, is of the view that the island-nation's worst recorded natural disaster "has been a spur, or the trigger, which has accelerated the process" of the Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) working together on development issues. In an interview with V.S. Sambandan for The Hindu on January 26, Mr. Kadirgamar outlined the Gov ernment's concept of a non-political, development framework to work with the LTTE, which, he hoped, could "provide a new platform on which the political structure can be built." Excerpts: Question: The tsunami has seen a major internationalisation of relief efforts in Sri Lanka. Is there a final figure on the international assistance? Lakshman Kadirgamar: The figures are not final. Within a few days it is very likely that we would have a very good understanding. Q: Do you see the possibility of the Sri Lankan conflict changing course after the tsunami? Kadirgamar: The tsunami, which obviously is no respecter of persons and property or regions, has devastated two-thirds of our coastline. Parts of the areas affected are in so-called LTTE controlled areas, where the Government's writ does not run on a day-to-day basis. There is an acute awareness on the part of the Government that the funds coming in are other peoples' funds. The Government is determined to ensure equitable distribution of funds. There will be no question of the Government discriminating between LTTE areas and Government areas. I have reason to believe that the LTTE is also fully aware of the implications of the tsunami in this respect. In respect of the LTTE-controlled areas, there will have to be a common effort to ensure that funds are properly and effectively deployed. The funds themselves will come to the Government and, therefore, it is the Government's duty to ensure that there is equitable allocation. Equally it is the LTTE's duty by the people who live in the areas controlled by them to cooperate in the equitable distribution of funds and the implementation of projects in the devastated areas under their control. Q: There are reports of the LTTE requesting funds to be directly sent to it. Has such a request come and what would be the Government's response? The question of funds being directly sent to them is not a matter which, so far, they have raised with the Government. The policy of the Government and the policy of the international donors has been that funds cannot be remitted directly to the LTTE. As the scenario unfolds and you come across problems of implementation of projects on the ground ... a route may have to be established where the funds officially come to the Government and then [are] given to various organisations operating in LTTE controlled areas ... for the reason that obviously given the situation, which has obtained for some years, the Government itself cannot go in and implement those projects on the ground. That is a reality one has to accept, so I see signs of the Government, the LTTE and the donors putting their act together of balancing two concepts — that funds cannot be given outright to the LTTE, as against the necessity for the LTTE, in its areas, to have a significant hand in the implementation of projects of the Government. This will have to be worked on. Q: Do you see it as a prelude to a political... ? In theory, certainly, because any kind of working together between parties that have been in conflict must surely provide a new platform on which the political structure can be built. Successful co-implementation of the kind of working arrangement we have in mind in the aftermath of the tsunami disaster could certainly provide that platform. Q: Could you elaborate on the working arrangements? There will have to be some kind of structure at the centre, with participation by the Government, the LTTE and other concerned parties to deal with the allocation of funds to projects. Then there will certainly have to be a structure with regional and district levels, with similar representative participation to work on the ground. Even in so-called LTTE-controlled areas, in addition to the LTTE, the Government and others will have to be represented — Muslims for instance — and international organisations perhaps, non-governmental organisations. So what is conceptually conceived of is a fairly comprehensive and well-balanced representation. This arrangement will not be simply Government and LTTE. It has to go wider than that. [Plurality and inclusiveness] will have to be reflected in order to make the structure, in order to give it a chance to work effectively. This appears to be one phase of devolution. More like development of financial devolution... .. per force of circumstances. The tsunami disaster has, in a sense, forced upon us a situation in which we have to work along the lines indicated with a degree of urgency that might not have been otherwise present. Tsunami has been the spur, or the trigger, which has accelerated the process of working together on these lines. It does certainly foreshadow a future of more elaborate and more permanent arrangement, with constitutional implications. ... This arrangement has no political context. Therefore an extrapolation from this arrangement to a more complex one has to be viewed with a degree of reserve. I think the best way of putting it is to say that this is a kind of a cruel blessing in disguise. Disaster has forced upon us an acute awareness of the imperative of working together in a development scenario. The concept of working together in a development scenario is something we have been talking about for decades but tsunami has forced it within a week. Q: The present path appears to be towards insulating disaster-management and relief from politics. Would you like to comment on the possibility or otherwise of the stalled peace talks being revived? No. The question of the peace talks, or attempts being made to resume the peace talks, which were discontinued almost two years ago now, has not been a matter for consideration at this point in time. Q: So the attempts to resume peace talks are on hold right now, so to say. Yes. Definitely. Q: Is the tsunami's impact on the military one of the reasons for putting peace talks in abeyance? No. No. I would say definitely not. The reason is a very simple, practical one. You can't be engaging at this time in very complex and difficult negotiations to get the peace talks started. Q: India was the first country to respond. Would you like to comment on the Indian assistance? Yes. I will be very happy to do so. India responded to our crisis on [December] 26th itself, within a few hours of the disaster having struck our shores. They sent material assistance within a few hours and the stream of assistance has continued and takes a variety of forms. India's long term commitment to reconstruction work, which will commence soon, has also been clearly stated. So India will be with us in the long haul, as the expression goes. India's cash contribution, equivalent of $ 22 million is very much appreciated. It is much more than a pledge. It is an outright grant, which will be used for certain types of reconstruction work, which India will decide on in consultation with the Government of Sri Lanka.
|
|
Contact
Information: Send mail to
