Mahinda in background of Commonwealth minisummit, photo by ComSec
Despite all the news coverage within SL, almost nothing on Sri Lanka has been released. There is one document where they’re asking what the UN thinks about Sri Lanka. There is today another cable from the London Embassy out which covers a discussion with Commonwealth Political Director Amitav Banerji in 2009. As usual, everyone is looking at the SL human rights record during the war. In this case, SL seems to have been denied the right to host the next Commonwealth meeting based on the same. The relevant text is reproduced below:
Banerji said that the human rights situation in Sri Lanka during and after the recent military offensive had been raised “informally and off the record” by the UK during the last CMAG meeting, forcing a difficult conversation with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, as Sri Lanka is currently a member of CMAG. Banerji said the Commonwealth continues to watch the situation in Sri Lanka and noted that Sri Lanka’s offer to host the next Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) had been turned down over concerns about lending international credibility to the Government’s actions.
Butenis seemed a little panicky, I trust there’s more juicier stuff to come.
She should be. The first cable is out: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/243811
That one is interesting. Confirms the general understanding that the immediate concerns of the Tamils of the North are bread and butter issues, and that they believe the truth will come out in good time. Sad that they feel vulnerable, but I guess that’s the reality.
The indicatioon seems to be that reconciliation would come eventually if the diaspora and the international community would leave well enough alone, and that possibly, accountability would follow.
“While Tamil leaders are very vocal and committed to national reconciliation and creating a political system more equitable to all ethnic communities, they believe themselves vulnerable to political or even physical attack if they raise the issue of accountability publicly, and common Tamils appear focused on more immediate economic and social concerns. A few have suggested to us that while they cannot address the issue, they would like to see the international community push it. Such an approach, however, would seem to play into the super-heated campaign rhetoric of Rajapaksa and his allies that there is an international conspiracy against Sri Lanka and its “war heroes.” ”
Isn’t that exactly right? Rather a good example of US diplomacy.