SRI LANKA (SL) WAR CRIMES –THE WEST NOT DELHI WILL DELIVER JUSTICE TO THE VICTIMS
by Vssubramaniam
October 09, 2009
The trigger for the enlightened West’s enthusiastic pursuit of justice for Tamils was the (10-19 May 2009) massacres by the Sri Lankan (SL) armed forces of over 20 000 civilians along with a white flag waving group of the Tamil resistance (LTTE) leaders in the narrow ‘no fire’ zone. Committed officials in the OCRHC and mandated human rights groups armed with graphic evidence/accounts of these atrocities guided the West in its noble mission to bring justice to the victims. SL that had successfully evaded justice for its six decades long genocide had all the reasons to embark upon far more serious and blatant war crimes ; namely the outrageous interning of 300 000 civilians in a Nazi+ style camps deserving not mere condemnation but urgent protective international intervention to save their lives.
Arraigned against the West over its May initiatives were ranked human rights abusers (India included) who manipulated the May meeting into applauding SL for its victory over the Tamil resistance overlooking the UNHRC’s role to redress the sufferings of the victims and protecting them from further atrocities. To SL and Delhi the May resolution was a license to commit more heinous crimes, namely to intern civilians (potential eye witnesses of the war crimes in the ‘no fire zone’) in massive numbers in sub human conditions to induce their death through hunger, disease and disappearances. These events spread a sense of doom and gloom amongst the Tamils worldwide.
The OCRHC sponsored ICC route is the accepted modality to redress the sufferings of genocide victims. Of a total membership of 49 states in UNHRC only the Western nations signed up in good faith subscribing to the modalities and humane principles underlying UNHRC’s noble role. Disgracefully most UNHRC member nations indulge in trading council votes (for geo-political, economic and pecuniary considerations) hijacking the UNHRC’s basic agenda and hence its effectiveness. This body as shamefully constituted passed resolutions applauding the perpetrators of war crimes thus encouraging them to commit more outrageous war crimes with impunity. Political undercurrents brought together strange bedfellows into a coalition (India, China, Pakistan, and OIC) to produce this outcome. Delhi that championed this tragic outcome for the Tamil victims regretfully produced outcomes potentially most damaging to India itself.
Delhi played down the damaging outcomes of the May meeting though it exposed how awry was its strategy that SL hastily allowed China and Pakistan firm footholds in India’s underbelly and constantly embarrassing Delhi harassing the TN fishermen straining Chennai/Delhi relations (SL is associated with China’s plans to weaken India by balkanising it). China’s belligerent territorial claims over ‘Arunachal Pradesh as ‘historically ...parts of Tibet at one time’ was timed to sober Delhi’s euphoria over its successful UNHRC May vote. Simultaneously OIC that as a group joined to support Delhi in the May SL vote voiced open support for Pakistan over the Kashmir issue forsaking India. The implication is that the OIC has the voting strength to bring India’s human rights abuses in Kashmir before a UNHRC though the OCRHC and other mandated human rights agencies haven’t amassed that amount of incriminating evidence as they had in SL’s war crimes case. Delhi set an unhealthy precedent when in the SL case it voted not on the merits of the charges but on the basis of its own geo-political interests. It thus abdicated all moral grounds to complain should OIC explain its actions to its own geopolitical interests. The quirk of irony is that the West that India arraigned against to support SL, desperately needs the West’s support in case Delhi has to face OIC’s Kashmir UNHRC initiatives. Whether SL itself will vote with Delhi alienating its powerful supporters in the OIC like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and even Libya is anyone’s guess. Though hypothetical now it is the West that will save Delhi from the predicament it created.
The transient political undercurrents behind the May 2009 UNHRC coalition vote apparently ended with that one meeting. Would not a sensitive Delhi distance itself from SL that is more closely allied to an Iran led OIC especially when the Bloc’s stance over India’s close to heart Kashmir issue is openly hostile. Strong hints on Narayanan trio’s role in planning the May 16-19 massacres given by Gothabhaya Rajapakse now in the public domain raises serious questions of the circumstances that compels Delhi’s meek and stooping stance before a bellicose and provocative SL. SL is virtually dictating India’s Delhi’s foreign policy and Delhi-Chennai relations? Delhi apparently dreads the UNHRC SL war crime initiatives more than SL does that for the Tamil genocide victims UNHRC is virtually paralysed over delivering justice to genocide victims.
Tags: War Crimes Genocide UNHRC
Rate It:
