21 November 2018

National Security and Megalomaniacs (UNP) of SriLanka

 Kanthar Balanathan

Taking a birds-eye view of the situation in Sri Lanka, an intelligent person should be able to conclude whether Ranil Wickramasinghe (RW) is a patriotic honest person to govern as a PM of SriLanka. He contested with Chandrika and lost. RW could not win in any presidential election to become the President. Every time he wins, he is so cunning and turns out to be a cinema actor, to become the PM, and somehow, he takes control over the President and does whatever he wants to do. During the time when Chandrika was the President, RW created the historical west formulated CFA, i.e. Cease Fire Agreement. CFA was created for the West to pump in more weapons and heavy weapons into LTTE controlled areas. Sri Lankans should think as to how a terrorist group can smuggle heavy weapons into Mullivaykal area. Not only artillery but aircraft in a dismantled state. These were smuggled through in containers, in the name of Humans aid, possibly in the night. It is correct to assume that the military and Police in Sri Lanka are so dumb and corrupt not to understand and those posted for checks would have been supporters of UNP and slaves of RW.

Just imagine and think how LTTE could have transported or smuggled all these heavy weapons into the area. These were done with the aid of western Coolies/janissaries and Chandrika was so dumb not to understand this act.

In the 70s Norway started a project to manufacture Fibre Glass Boats. I and a high Officer visited this place in the name of a Technical visit. We were able to pick up some signals of terrorist support activities in Karainager. Some youths were given visas to Norway. This was an underhand work.
As PM, RW was aiding and abetting in the Treasury bond scam. AS PM, the PM is also responsible for the finance of the country and see that no irregularities occur in Banks. However, we now know that he played with Arjuna Mahendran to plunder and diplomatically rob the Central Bank. RW knows that the citizens of SL are imbecilic not to understand Economics and Finance, which made him plunder the CB.

With 41 seats in parliament, he was made the PM in 2015. Quote: HLD Mahindapala : Without being judgmental, it cannot be denied that all hell broke loose after Supreme Court issued the interim order to reverse the President’s decision to (1) appoint a new prime minister (“in his opinion”, as he did when he appointed Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister when he had only 41 MPs in a House of 225) and (2) hold general elections on January 7, 2019. Ref: http://nrnmind.blogspot.com/ - The Only Way Out.

Today RW is challenging as to all what he did was correct -- a big FOOL. Is he an Attorney? How long was he in politics? He should go to the cinema industry, a better place for him.
During CB’s time as PM RW was bossing CB. During MS time he was controlling and intimidating to take the upper hand and trying to show that he is the BIG BOSS and NOT MS. Educated people should know that they have to work within their limits of authority. Just because he is a politician RW should not think that he is above the LAW. RW is NOT above the Law.
RW organised an economic transformation/improvement/development conference in Colombo in 2016. He acted like an idiot not to invite and allowed to participate a local expert / Professors/ Specialists to give a speech in that conference. How the damn hell do external foreign delegates know the local situation. Professor  Ricardo Haussmann facilitated the conference. My reply to Professor Ricardo Hausmann can be read, here: http://nrnmind.blogspot.com/2016/01/28-the-January-2016-professorricardo.html.

RW attempted to bribe the politicians to support the constitutional amendments by approving cars unto 300 million rupees. Even damn laughable, irrational Vijayakala Maheswaran was to be approved several millions. Is that the correct way to govern a country? RW moved outside without the knowledge of the President MS to implement and do things which harmed the country.

The only people who appreciated the CFA was the LTTE Leader Prabakaran and the West. Prabakaran had lots of food to eat e.g. biriyani, Noodles etc, swimming pool to bathe, however, ordinary citizens of SL were suffering to have one good meal a day because of your steps to make the poor suffer.

You seem to love foreigners, especially the WEST, and the LTTE, and not your own citizens of SL.
Up to now, Arjuna Mahendran is missing in the media, and you have not made any statement or taken any steps to bring him law & order or refund the money.
New Constitution: A new constitution is not warranted during the current economic situation. Further, RW has no idea or understanding of the Tamil behaviour. CVV states that only development will occur when they are given power and rights. What rights do Tamils not have RW? Do you know the caste issues among Tamils? It is because of the Sinhala government Tamils are able to survive and breathe. Already oppressing minority low caste Tamils is worsened in the NPC. What they want is absolute power so that they can maintain their own stock in the upper position and suppress the lowers. Already the villages and towns of non-elites have been ignored, lower class people have been ignored for government jobs. DO you know that RW?

A new constitution /amendment is unwarranted now. Please get out of the PM’s official residence and allow the new cabinet to do their function.

For no reason, you shall assume that the West will come to your assistance, as they have other countries to look after and they will never ever, want to become their enemy. You should have studied from the US/North Korea affair if you were intelligent.

Only a few plunders have been outlined here, however, media has brought out all of your corrupt practice.

My Dear RW: Please know that Diasporas are not Fools but we are watching every act of yours from overseas. We are not in the 50s but in the 21st century. Know that you FOOL.

Recently you stated: “People have spoken”. No, you fool its not the people, but the people’s representative. People do not know what their reps are deciding. Therefore practically, it’s not the people who have spoken. But the corrupt politicians who favour money.

Why do you think your MPs lifted and showed their අමුඩේ and brought knives into the parliament and fought? If there is to be an election now, then they need money for the corrupt election. Short notice means they have to spend their money and it will take time to earn that money after election, and further if they lose (which is definite) everything is gone. The election tone drove their mind to a psychological disorder and become psychiatric patients because of the money drain.

The Supreme Court should conclude that the President MS, took a wise decision and correct step to remove you from the PM position to save the country from National Security and Economic Collapse. That’s what CIA does. “National Security

NATIONAL SECURITY IS THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE FOR A COUNTRY

NOT SAMBANTHAR/LTTE/WEST

19 November 2018

The ONLY way out

H. L. D. Mahindapala

Leaving aside the legalities, politicalities, Constitutionalities and the complexities of the current imbroglio in which the nation is grounded (temporarily), the underlying issues in the Constitutional crisis can be reduced to one single question: At a time when all three branches of the state are trapped in a deadlock without a pragmatic solution in sight should not the people – the ultimate sovereign authority acceptable to all competing parties for  power – be allowed to express their will in deciding who should be empowered to govern them? Right now the crisis is in the failure to decide who should govern the people. Rival parties are claiming legitimacy. However, all parties are agreed on holding elections. If so why not hold elections, leaving aside the legalities, politicalities, Constitutionalities and the complexities?
The crisis haunting the state is deteriorating at a rapid rate daily. The befuddled nation has hit rock bottom. The chaos that reigns supreme is confined to Parliament for the moment. Fortunately, the burning passions of politics have not spilled over to the streets so far. Rightly or wrongly, some attribute the prevailing disorder directly to the decision of the Supreme Court which has had a direct impact on rival parties competing for power. Though it is an interim order, without any finality about it, the immediate political consequences has been to exacerbate the polarisation of the opposing parties.
This certainly was not the intention of the Supreme Court. But the unintended consequences have led to further polarisation and destabilisation of the nation. Undoubtedly, this points to the fact that decision-makers at all levels must factor in the possible unintended consequences which can throw the nation into an uncontrollable spin. Without being judgmental, it cannot be denied that all hell broke loose after Supreme Court issued the interim order to reverse the President’s decision to (1) appoint a new prime minister (“in his opinion”, as he did when he appointed Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister when he had only 41 MPs in a House of 225) and (2) hold general elections on January 7, 2019.
In a politically charged atmosphere, some may even conclude that the Supreme Court had poured a bucket of fuel into the sparks that were waiting to blow up into an unmanageable conflagration. Prime time news globally is having a field day exposing the mayhem of the white-clad MPs going at each other on the floor of the House. There is no doubt now that if the prevailing agony is prolonged it will lead to undermine the foundations and the future of the oldest Asia-Pacific democracy which began in 1931 with the introduction of universal franchise.
Despite criticisms against the decision of the Supreme Court – and many more are due to be hurled depending on the final decision in early December  --  it is also absolutely clear that, as things stand now, the only authority that can produce a solution is the Supreme Court. Though nominally it has been asked to define the law that should guide the nation in this crisis, in reality it has been asked to play a decisive political role -- perhaps the most critical in its history -- that can either plunge the nation instantly into ungovernable disorder, perhaps leading to a crisis as harrowing as the 33-year-old North-South war which ended only the other day, or save the nation from the impending descent into hell.
In this maddening crisis the shocked, mystified and confused people are looking for a saviour. Only the Supreme has the power to play that role at a time when the naked power struggle is exploding in all its fury on the floor of the House. It looks as if we are in a free fall, tumbling in a bottomless vacuum, without any means to stop it. The Supreme Court, consisting of citizens of this nation, is not that naïve to hide behind the illusion of being above all that is going on now, with each day dragging the nation deeper into the depths of despair. The future is in its hands.
Their task right now is also to make the future safe and liveable. It has the option to return to the fundamental political principles enunciated in the Mahavamsa:1.  make “our island a fit dwelling  place for men.” (MV 1:44) and 2.anoint the king / state that can pave the path “for the good of all” (MV IV:7). It is also in the interests of the judges to do so because from the day after they retire they too will step down into the world they are about to make from the bench. They too will be recipients of the consequences they make in early December.
Of course, the Supreme Court, inter alia, will have to face myriad questions before it sits down to write the final verdict that will make or break the nation. The most convulsive and dizzying issue it has to face is the “bahu-bootha Constitution”, as described aptly by the former President Chandrika Kumaratunga. Disentangling the contradictory provisions of a constitution, made hurriedly and expediently for competing  political  parties to perpetuate their rule forever, will be like cleaning  the Augean stables. In one sense, the Supreme Courts is asked to purify the Constitution which has been cut, chopped and twisted into a divisive and destructive tool by power-hungry politicians. This, at first sight, requires a surgical operation to remove the cancer of the powers concentrated in the Presidency and the Prime Minister in Parliament. Recent history indicates clearly that neither of the two parties can be trusted to perform their duties with commendable integrity.
When the two critical branches of the power – the Legislature and the Executive – are at loggerheads and fail to generate trust in the body politic who then can be trusted to fulfil the duties of the state? The obvious answer is the Supreme Court, the third arm of the state. Right now all eyes are focussed on the Supreme Court wondering whether it will act as the benign and rational provider of an answer that will serve the prime interests of the people without dipping its neutral hands in the murky and corrupted waters of politics.  
So the task before the Courts is daunting and yet rewarding if it can step in to enshrine the sovereignty of the people in whose name the Constitution was made. It will have to walk a tight rope between the tangled legalities and a lasting pragmatic / people-oriented solution that would rescue the nation. It will be torn between two masters: serving the law and the serving the best interests of the sovereign people. Of the two, legal minds generally agree that the sovereign rights of the people stand way above the capricious interpretations of the unreliable law. Going to courts is like a woman going into a saree shop: when every saree is attractive who knows which one she will pick? So which way will the Court go? Is there a guiding star for the Courts to navigate their way through a rock and a hard place?
In the current crisis it is obvious that primacy should be given, above all other considerations, to pragmatism, because the Constitution, with its contradictory dialectics, is bedevilling not only the best of legal minds but also the future of peace and stability. By and large, the people expect their right to carry on their normal lives in a stable and nonviolent society be restored by the final decision of the Supreme Court. The nation is not only befuddled but horrifited by the legal eagles propounding contradictory interpretations of the “bahu-bootha Constitution”. Each party is emphasising the clause/s favourable to them at the expense of the other - a common practice in the legal profession. But in this complex and confusing situation preserving the democratic norms and, most of all, serving the overall interests of the sovereign people, leaderless at the moment, should be given priority. At this moment the Supreme Court is tasked with the unenviable  mission of leading the nation out of darkness. When the other two competing branches are locked in a do-or-die battle for power can the Supreme Court, acting as the neutral third party, rise as the saviour of the nation?
It is also necessary in this confusing state, clouded with teeming questions, to define the central issue/s to find the answer/s. Coming  down to  the  nitty-gritty, I think the following two questions are relevant: 1. Can the head of state sack the prime minister who commands a majority in the House? Related to this is the other: 2. In a crisis situation where the two main branches of the state – the legislature and the executive – are locked in an impasse, virtually paralysing the state, should the judiciary, the third branch, acting as the neutral umpire, decide to hand over power to the people, which seems to be the most reasonable and pragmatic way out? 
Those looking for answers will find the most relevant precedent in modern Australian history. At a time when the law is groping in the dark, clutching at straws, a solid precedent can be the guiding light that can lead the ship of the state to arrive safely in the harbour, without sinking in the dangerously choppy seas. The classic Australian precedent that will be outlined below can be considered to be the answer to the issues surrounding the current Sri Lankan crisis The Australian example can be the most decisive  precedent – more  powerful than any legal provision  – because right now Sri Lanka is running on parallel constitutional lines traversed by Australia in its biggest ever political / constitutional crisis. The parallels are too close to ignore. Sri Lanka is confronted with almost the identical two issues listed above. It is these two constitutional issues that threw Australia into the biggest ever political confrontation between the Right and Left forces. 
On November 11, 1975 Gough Whitlam, Prime Minister of the Labour Government, who was in command of the Lower House with a safe majority, was heading for a crisis because  he could not get his money supply  bill through the Senate, the upper House, which was in the hands of the conservative Liberal Party, headed by Malcolm Fraser. Christmas was coming round the corner and the public servants and the private contractors could not be paid if he could not get the Right-wing Senate to pass the bill.
Monitoring these events in the background was the CIA. Needless to say, that it was not quite pleased with Whitlam’s Left-wing foreign policy which was not quite acceptable to the larger interests of  America leading the Cold War.. Whitlam boldly broke rank with the Western camp when he refused to be one of the subservient Cold War warriors who  treated China as a pariah of the international community and recognised Communist China. At this time America had gone to the extreme of blocking China’s entry into the UN. To the Western alliance, obsessed with the fear-mongering theory of “domino effect”, recognising Communist China was alarming in the ‘70s. Whitlam had also threatened to close down American bases, including the strategic Pine Gap. On top of it all, in 1974 White House sent Marshal Green, “the coup master” who engineered the fall of Sukarno in Indonesia, as ambassador to Australia. 
Whitlam too blundered and played into the hands of the Right-wing opponents waiting to overthrow his Labour Government with his rather amateurish but inspired Left-leaning politics. Most of all, his government was riddled with financial scandals. His popularity was waning in the electorate. It was against this backdrop that Whitlam went in the morning of November 11 to the residence of the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, who was suspected of having links to the CIA. Earlier Sir.John had joined Association for Cultural Freedom, a right-wing group financed by CIA and conspiracy theorists accused him of being in the pay of CIA.
Whitlam was going to offer the Governor-General a solution to break the deadlock by offering to hold half senate elections hoping to get a majority in the Upper House. But Sir John, who was handpicked by Whitlam, had other ideas. He was going to appoint a Right-wing caretaker government led by the Opposition Leader, Malcolm Fraser and hold a general election as the way out. It was a classic power struggle within a parliamentary democracy. But how was the Sir. John, the representative of the neutral Queen who had to be consulted, going to resolve the crisis? Could he sack the Prime Minister who was in command of the majority in Parliament? Could he appoint the Leader of the Opposition as the care-taker Prime Minister? Could he declare a general election asking the people to decide the next step? Was he prepared to do a Pontius Pilate and wash his hands off, allowing the rival parties to battle it out? Or was he inclined to play a partisan role favouring the pro-American political leader? In his opinion, the state was corrupt and dysfunctional, lurching from crisis to crisis, unable even to deliver money to pay its functionaries. So did he overstep the democratic and constitutional norms in sacking a prime minister who had a majority in the House? Was he right in handing the final decision to the people and wait for their verdict? Though liberal political passions of the day were bitterly opposed to him did history eventually absolve him for pulling the nation out of the quagmire by handing power to the people to deliver their verdict and make democracy function again? 
One of the primary tests of a democracy is when the state honours its moral and political obligation to consult the people periodically, or as and when it is required by law. However, if a state, paralysed by internal tensions and divisions, is heading towards a critical crisis with no end in sight, is it the duty of the head of state to go before the people as the neutral and final authority to deliver a final verdict? If there is a log jam someone must intervene to open up space for the non-violent and natural flow of events for democracy to regain its strength and function with vigour. There can be nothing undemocratic, illegal or immoral about the state consulting the people, the sovereign base from which all democracies derive their power.
This is precisely what happened on November 11, 1975 in Australia. The Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, sacked the Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, Labour Party, and handed over power to a caretaker Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, the leader of the biggest party in the Opposition which, “in his opinion”, had a chance of winning power in both Houses. If the people’s verdict went against the caretaker Prime Minister then the status quo ante would have returned with the consent of the people.  
Of course, there were behind-the-scene manoeuvres that influenced Sir. John to sack the Prime Minister. Sir. John  cut a deal with Fraser to protect his interests in the event of his retiring.. That apart, what is most relevant is the drama that was played publicly on the political stage.  Both political parties agreed that the solution was an election. But they differed on the nature of the next election. Whitlam wanted only a majority in the Senate to get his money bill passed. So he offered half an election for the Senate, hoping the people will give him the majority he needed in the Upper House. Fraser, on the other hand wanted a full election, hoping to overthrow the unpopular Labour government.
Both Whitlam and Fraser were locked in a power struggle and neither was willing to budge. Sir John, rightly or wrongly, stepped in and sacked the Prime Minister and appointed the Leader of the Opposition as the care-taker prime minister. Elections were held and Fraser won. Australia returned to normalcy and stability again.
This, in broad outline, is how Australia came out unscathed from its biggest constitutional crisis. By now discerning readers would have detected sufficient similarities in Australian and the Sri Lankan constitutional crises. An internal crisis was reaching its critical point in Sri Lanka. The President stepped in first to prorogue Parliament and later to sack the Prime Minister and hold elections. Of course, there are some significant differences in details. But, in essence, both constitutional crises find common ground on the central issue: Can the head of a democratic state (the Executive) sack a prime minister who cannot deliver despite his majority in the House (the Legislature)? How is the prime minister going  to make the dysfunctional state, bogged down in  sordid politics, serve the larger interests of the disillusioned people lost without a promising future? Can the prime minister be allowed to impose his arbitrary will, abusing and subverting democratic parliamentary norms blatantly? Besides, the Yahapalanaya government was riddled with scandals of corruption, with more than a nudge-and-a-wink from the Prime Minister. He had taken the corrupt state to an irreversible and dysfunctional point, dropping the nation into a state of permanent crisis. The future seemed bleak.   
So can an immoral majority in Parliament be allowed to run a dysfunctional state? Only the steely, incontestable laws of mathematics do not recognise morality. Its immutable numbers has almost a divine force  to act as a dictatorial force which no one can  contest. But how moral is a state run on pure numbers? The morality that underpins good governance should necessarily rise way above the games of numbers which can be manipulated with money. A parliament must be redeemed from corrupt manipulations driven by numbers alone.
The Australian crisis began and ended within one afternoon. Time was of the essence. Any magisterial power must act swiftly to prevent the deterioration  of the crisis into lower depths. Perpetuating paralysed governments will not serve the best interests of Parliament, Presidency, people or the Judiciary. The Australian  example leads the way in this respect too.  Whitlam came back from the Governor-General’s residence and passed a vote of confidence in the House with a majority of ten. But it could not be handed over to the Governor-General in time.  By the time the Speaker was admitted to the residence of Governor-General to convey the House's message to Sir. John  it was too late. The Speaker was held up at the gate for a long time by the staff of the Governor-General playing for time. In the meantime, Parliament was dissolved. Whitlam was slow to draw. Sir.John fired first shot which hit the target. The proclamation dissolving Parliament was read on the steps of the Parliament by the Secretary to the Governor-General. Elections were held on December 13. The crisis was over and democracy and stability was restored.
Does all this ring a bell?
In the Sri Lankan example, however, the Opposition had time to go to the Supreme Court and obtained a stay order. The deleterious consequences are quite apparent even to a blind man’s dog.
It is in the light of the current state of chaos that the Australian experience provides an unerring sense of direction. Australia has established the precedent of dissolving parliament in time of crises, overriding limitations imposed by law,  and giving the sovereign people the right to decide their future. It has worked effectively. This is where a precedent gains the validity of a  moral force as great as the law. The backbone of the unwritten British Constitution has been the accumulation of pragmatic precedents. Precedents have translated into conventions and parliamentary traditions which, in turn, have  come to rest as the  bedrock of the British Conostitution. It has gathered a force as great, if not greater, than the written law. The time-tested precedents can also provide solutions to vexed issues polarising and destabilising democracies.
The Australian precedent is the best people-oriented and pragmatic solution available to the nation in this hour of need. Our “bahu-bootha Constitution” provides clauses / arguments for both contending parties to push their partisan interests with co-equal legal force. Legal eagles are looking up to the Supreme Court to pick one or the other clause that favours their political  interests. Any decision it takes on pure legalities is bound to damage its image. Besides, it will end  up as an exercise in futility as any legal interpretation of a flawed and a highly controversial Constitution will be seen as a partisan and divisive act that will not solve the crisis. Also appointing a lame-duck prime minister who will be powerless to move in any positive direction in the remaining 16 months will only exacerbate the prevailing chaos. The respect and the neutrality of the Supreme Court will be enhanced only if it acknowledges the Australian precedent and cut short the prolonging of the prevailing agony.
The sobering consequences of the Australian precedent has established that, more than the contradictory law, which can be influenced, swayed and re-written by foreign and moneyed forces, it is the people who must be given the right to express their will, within the shortest possible time, to prevent destabilisation and blood baths. In a democracy the right of defining and creating the future lies solely with the people and not with any branch of the state trapped in divisive and destructive politics.

Lord Naseby, a well-meaning friend of Sri Lanka,  had the last  word on this subject. He said  that similar things happens in Western parliaments too. And he added: “It can be unusual but not unconstitutional!”. 
Regime-changing the Regime change in Sri Lanka

By shenali Waduge
Governments come & governments go – that is clear evidence of a vibrant democracy. People go for elections – they bring governments to power & they can bring down governments too. We have seen that happening too. But all this becomes a little complicated when groups of external players enter the scene to mess with people’s minds, when they plug fake stories, fund campaigns & even individuals & groups. All this becomes unfair & corrupt practices. But, we know this is a phenomena happening in all parts of the world & these colored regime change revolutions are the new modus operandi in placing in power governments & leaders who are ready to be the local conduit to various agendas set in motion to destabilize & weaken nations. A country geopolitically & commercially important as Sri Lanka is a paradise for every external party and it is in our ability to understand & link how other countries with asset interests to external forces have fallen, that makes it easier for citizens to surround & protect the leaders working in the interest of the nation & not the locals facilitating the interests of the external forces.

The regime change that took place in 2015 was in for a democratic regime change in 2018 and shockingly delivered by the puppet the regime changers thought would dance to their tune. When people become too cocky with confidence they let their guard down & it was either the wind blew alert of an assassination or impeachment that led to the President clean bowling the mastermind behind the plot.

In a case of rubbing salt into the wound, his replacement became everyone’s bête noire and all this took place on 26 October 2018 totally unaware to everyone. Keeping the excitement in full throttle came the proroguing of parliament, dissolution of parliament & then the democracy cheerleaders that were too chicken to go to courts against the sacking of the PM, dashing to court to file petitions against holding elections & as a result of a court order pending final verdict the entire country is in a standstill.

To make matters worse the Speaker joins the fracas by adding fuel to the fire issuing bizarre statements & proving by action his bias. The sacked PM says he is still the PM, the Speaker refuses to accept the new PM as the PM but accepts the No Confidence Motion & passes that in 10 minutes without following standing orders or due process.

The most flogged argument in a well-planned psychological effort to instill fear among public is to spread the notion that we must fear the West. Therefore, the hysteria promoted is ‘what will West do now’ we are not behaving as per their ‘democracy’ ‘liberal’ ways…the sacked PM too promoted the notion that the West would sanction Sri Lanka because he was dethroned. Well, we have news for you scardy-cats…western nations maybe powerful by virtue of their military might & the bloc nations that they use to bully others… but these nations are all throwing stones from glass houses. They are no beacons of virtue, they commit the biggest human rights violations, they are the real violators of democracy & it is time we read out their record sheet.

Let’s take the UK first, and always keep in mind that these Western nations interfere in nations for commercial & geopolitical interests & ‘democracy’ is simply a convenient excuse to camouflage their real intent. They use global corporates on the boards of which are former government heads & officials to force developing nations to privatize. This is the new norm happening across the world. They use global entities like IMF & WB to entrap nations into debt & demand returns that insist on cutting welfare systems of the people.

Let’s not forget that the arms & ammunition sold for profit to Saudi & allies now bombing Yemen have killed over 10,000 Yemeni civilians & brought the nation to the brink of starvation. These probably align to ‘British values’ & American ‘democracy’ & ‘human rights’.

These paragons of virtue didn’t mind cutting deals with Libya either – during deals (£550m  shell oil ) brokered under Tony Blair the Libyan leader was Col. Muammar Gaddafi but when they wanted to oust him, Gaddafi became a ‘dictator’. Same fate happened to Saddam Hussein, UK PM Thatcher had no issues selling him arms during 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war & while he killed plenty of Kurds in 1988, but Saddam went on to become a ‘dictator’ with US-UK-NATO deciding to liberate the Iraqi people.

Let’s go a little further into history, remember how UK described Chile’s Augusto Pinochet as Britain’s ‘true friend’ and this was throughout the period he was murdering Chileans. Let’s cross over to Indonesia… remember Gen. Suharto – he came to power from a military coup in 1965 and went on to occupy East Timor in 1975, UK PM Thatcher too described him as ‘one of our very best and most valuable friends’ and he was even a State Guest in 1979… this is the man who killed lakhs of people.

In case we miss to mention, the democratic government of Iran led by Mossadegh was overthrown by a US-UK coup & the Shah of Iran was installed. Why was Mossadegh overthrown you may ask, he was replaced simply because he was planning to nationalize Iran’s oil industry. Can you imagine these virtuous countries US & UK overthrowing a democratically elected leader simply because he wanted to nationalize Iran’s oil!!! So much for democracy!

Some of these virtuous democracy angels in the West have got quite personal too … we have all heard of the personal letters sent by the Queen to Idi Amin, UK’s Ramsay MacDonald wrote to Italy’s Mussolini, Austen Chamberlain even went on a holiday with him.
The image of ‘dictator’ was one that was built slowly against Mahinda Rajapakse too… thankfully Sri Lanka being a small island the lies can’t take flight as easily without counter reactions. However, we can recall how the US citizens were made to believe Gaddafi, Saddam were all ‘evil dictators’ had these Americans been a little more read about world happenings they would not be taken for a jolly ride so easily but because they are clueless about world affairs the US UK & NATO got away promoting their trained mercenaries as rebels & sent them to Syria where the duty of the West was to deliver democracy & get rid of ‘evil dictator’ Assad.

The manner Kosovo, South Sudan were given independence, the manner populist leaders like Haiti’s Aristade were ousted is a case in point for Sri Lanka to keep in mind as West are not too fond of populist leaders who make it difficult for West to push their anti-national agendas.

India that proudly partners the West must surely be aware that balkanizing India is also on the West’s shopping list – no different to how Soviet Union & Yugoslavia were split. Already the Missionary network are working underground.

The West’s interference in Sri Lanka has become all too obvious. The first open signal came when a set of Western envoys visited deposed PM before making official courtesy call to the new PM – their statements too flout diplomatic protocols. Regularly these envoys are seen visiting the deposed PM and moreover they are even attending Parliament & have been present in the Supreme Court when the petitions against dissolution of parliament to hold elections were filed. The manner that some JVP MPs were behaving in Parliament functioning as a proxy UNP clearly showed how compromised they have become too. How are these engagements part of their diplomatic work??? Are these not poking their noses into the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. These are silly questions to even ask when considering the interferences these very nations get up to in other countries.
 
If Sri Lankans do not know of West’s record sheet they are unlikely to understand the exact nature of the battleground we are dealing with. It is in being aware of US – UK – NATO & all other nations that have played roles in regime change, liberal capitalist neo-con privatization schemes, illegal interventions & occupations & a general overview of how invisible agents operates can Sri Lankans understand the need to back any leader who is not aligned to these forces & reject any leader who are backed by these forces and the locals that back them.

That effort has been made easy by the fact that the very forces that helped bring the regime change – from politicians, political parties, media, social media groups, lawyers, ‘academics’, ‘civil society’ etc are the very people scrambling to return the deposed former prime minister back into the saddle. Their latest propaganda is to shout #democracywins & pretend to be mouthpiece for democracy but they go mute when questioned as to why they did not oppose UNP JVP TNA passing special bills to delay elections & not holding elections from August 2015 to February 2018!

That they were all using the President as a scapegoat can be seen in the manner that they are all now throwing bricks, when in 2015 they were throwing bouquets. All of them are however mum about a string of illegalities, irregularities that their hero has committed since January 2015 – Bond Scam, nepotism, favoritism to school buddies, autocratic rule, not informing President, passing bills by inserting additional clauses not inserted at committee stage, deceptive manner that the new constitution was to be passed, detrimental Bills that would have sold national resources & assets and a wave of privatization that would have given foreigners freehold of land, we would have lost our airports, ports, harbors, forest reserves, land around strategic areas/assets to foreign privatization projects.

The ruckus in parliament would have been costly but had that not happened all of the items mentioned would have been passed & we would have never been able to get these back without going for international courts resulting in compensating these foreign companies for damages in reversing agreements signed. If people are able to understand these dangers, they would clearly see why Sri Lankan voters need to in future always vote for a leader who has the interest of the nation and is not working to fulfill the interests of foreigners.  

US Provides Military Assistance to 73 Percent of World’s Dictatorships

How U.S. Military Bases Back Dictators, Autocrats, And Military Regimes

William Blum gives a long list of other people’s governments overthrown by the US –https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/how-us-military-bases-back-dictators-autocrats-and-military-regimes_us_591b229ae4b05dd15f0ba8e6

US military bases in 172 countries

America dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016 

CIA killings – tactics used  – face cream, cigar, milkshake for Castro, toothpaste for Congo’s Lumumba, pizza for Hezbullah – 13 million pages of declassified documents from 1940s to 1990s

The people must now realize by the bloc uniting to replace the ousted Prime Minister that their motives camouflaged by democracy dictums have nothing to do with the interests of the Nation or its People. This alone suffices to awaken the people as to the lurking dangers & the need to defeat them democratically at a future election if the people wish to secure the sovereignty of Sri Lanka.
Keep in mind that there is an assassination attempt on the President which was the reason for removing the PM… we demand an investigation into this as we know too well how many foreign leaders have also been assassinated by these democracy angels.
We do not want Sri Lanka to become another ‘We came, we saw, he died… & we laughed’ story!

This island is thrice blessed by Buddha, divine forces work in mysterious ways to safeguard the nation and we will come out of this calamity too.




Shenali D Waduge

Some posts on FaceBook
      


16 November 2018

SPUR condemns international interference in SL

The Society for Peace Unity and Human Rights for Sri Lanka (SPUR), encourages all parties embroiled in the struggle for political supremacy in Sri Lanka to respect the authority of the Executive President, Maithripala Sirisena and abide by the rulings given by Sri Lanka's Supreme Court.

SPUR condemns the blatant interference of the European Union, Britain, the United States and a number of other countries who erroneously believe Sri Lanka to be a colonial state under their rule, forgetting that we have been an independent nation for the last 70 years. These so-called guardians of democracy have been joined by a few international agencies and a bunch of tin-pot civil society organizations, who couldn't muster a crowd to fill a dozen Tuk-Tuks plying on Sri Lanka's roads.

The collective body of these paragons of virtue stands condemned for maintaining deathly silence:

1. When Ranil Wickremesinghe became the Prime Minister in 2015 January with only 46 seats in parliament, whilst the party with over 150 seats was condemned to the opposition;

2. When the United States of America blatantly boasted in public that they funded and was a major stakeholder of the initiative to execute Sri Lanka's regime change;

3. While the Ranil Wickremesinghe led government continued to delay provincial council elections manipulating the parliament to subvert democracy and disenfranchise the voting public;

4. When the Good Governance finance minister had to step down due to corruption allegations and the Central Bank was relieved over a billion dollars by Ranil Wickremesinghe's bosom buddy, Arjuna Mahendran; and

5. While speaker Karu Jayasuriya is crafting a constitutional crisis blatantly violating the law challenging the authority of the President.

The list goes on.

In addition, we wish to point to the international community, United Nations and the Commonwealth Secretariat, who are like Flint on matters related to Sri Lanka, that they continue to be silent on the plight of the neighboring Buddhist country Thailand, where a military junta has been interfering in democracy since 2006. To the contrary, the biggest US force in years joined an annual military exercise in Thailand on 13 February 2018, despite controversy over the Thai junta's invitation to neighboring Myanmar's army, which has been accused of ethnic cleansing in the United Nations.

This breathtaking hypocrisy and blatant disregard of decency condemns the United States and its lackeys to the dustbin of treachery, and disqualifies them from making any comments on the conduct of the elected President of Sri Lanka, who believes he is putting in place necessary steps to protect the territorial integrity, sovereignty and the unitary status of Sri Lanka.

We urge the President of Sri Lanka not to blink whilst facing adversity and derogatory commentary from the bankrupt United National Front members and their impotent supporters, and hold general elections as planned.

We also urge the President to consider going for a referendum under Article 86 of the 2015 Constitution, which empowers him to "prepare a submission of matters with national importance to people by referendum", as detailed in page 64.

May the President’s noble gestures prevail over the international coup d'état.

DR DASARATH JAYASURIYA


President, SPUR Australia 

11 November 2018

Sri Lanka : Foreign Envoys flout Principle of Non-Interference/Non-Intervention & Diplomatic Protocols

There has been an unprecedented violation of diplomatic protocol of late. Tremendous pressures are being exerted on a small island nation in the South Asian continent simply because of its geopolitical presence & is a victim of a political tug-of-war between West-East / Colonial Imperial-Modern Neoliberal objectives.

Sri Lanka became independent in 1948 through it retain dominion status whereby Head of State remained the Queen. That status quo ended in 1972 with the first republican constitution which ideally placed Sri Lanka totally independent of any foreign rule. Head of State seized to be the Queen. Sri Lanka was ruled by citizens of its country & on behalf of the citizens. Relations with foreign nations was based on the respect for the others sovereignty & territorial integrity. Non-interference in the internal affairs of nations was one of the guiding principles of the UN Charter that brought nations together onto a common podium where respecting each other’s sovereignty countries dealt diplomatically with each other. However, is all this confined to paper & statements?

Several treaties & conventions have been passed in the UN to confirm the commitment to non-intervention & non-interference in the internal/domestic affairs of sovereign states.

·        14 December 1974 – resolution 3314 (XXIX), containing the Definition of Aggression,
·        December 1976/77,78,79, 1980 – resolutions 31/91 1976, 32/153 of 19 December 1977, 33/74 of 15 December 1978, 34/101 of 14 December 1979 and 35/159 of 12 December 1980 on non-interference in the internal affairs of States,
·        9 December 1981 – resolution 36/103. Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention and Interference in the Internal Affairs of States


The 1981 declaration reaffirmed the following
·        No state has the right to intervene directly or indirectly for any reason whatsoever in the internal or external affairs of any other State.
·        Fundamental principle of the UN Charter was that all states were duty-bound NOT TO threaten or use force against the sovereignty, political independence or territorial integrity of other States
·        Countries were bound to respect sovereignty of States over their natural resources irrespective of their political, economic or social systems

The principle of non-intervention & non-interference in the internal & external affairs of States placed the following rights & duties

I
1.   Sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity, national unity & security, national identity, cultural heritage of their people
2.   Sovereignty inalienable right of a State to determine its own political, economic, cultural & social system, permanent sovereignty over its natural resources according to the will of its people without outside intervention, interference, subversion, coercion or threat in any form whatsoever
3.   Right of states & people to have free access to information, their system of information & mass media, & to use their information media to promote their political, social, economic & cultural interests & aspirations

II
1.   States must refrain from threat or use of force in any form whatsoever to violate the existing internationally recognized boundaries of another state, to disrupt the political social or economic order of other States to overthrow or change the political system of another State or its Government (is this not what is now happening in Sri Lanka since 2015?)
2.   Duty of a State to ensure its territory is not used to violate the sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity & national unity or disrupt the political, economic & social stability of another State (Sri Lanka has not done this but Sri Lanka’s immediate neighbor has done so to Sri Lanka)
3.   States must refrain from armed intervention, subversion, military occupation or any other form of intervention & interference, overt or overt, directed at another State or group of States
4.   e) States must refrain from attempting to destabilize or undermine the stability of another state or any of its institutions. 
5.   f) States must refrain from promoting, encouraging or supporting direct or indirect rebellious or secessionist activities within other States (India was the logistics base for LTTE)
6.   g) States must prevent its territory being used for training, financing, recruitment of mercenaries or sending such mercenaries into another State (is this not what India did to Sri Lanka)
7.   h) States must refrain from agreements with other States designed to intervene or interfere in the internal & external affairs of third States (Is this not a violation that US-EU joint statements on Sri Lanka’s internal affairs are committing) 
8.   J) States must abstain from any defamatory campaigns, vilification or hostile propaganda for the purpose of intervening or interfering in the internal affairs of other states (Isn’t this exactly what the Western envoys, Indian envoy & western/Indian media & think tanks are presently doing?) 
9.   K) States must not use its external economic assistance program or adopt any multilateral & multinational corporations under its jurisdiction & control as instruments of political pressure or coercion against another State which is a violation of the UN Charter (Is this not what the West/Indian envoys & their media are directly conveying applying this as scare tactics – withdrawal of GSP, freeze on loans, bogus HR issues claiming to bring sanctions etc) 
10.            L) States must refrain from exploiting & distorting human rights issues to interfere in the internal affairs of States, exerting pressure on other States, creating distrust & disorder within & among States or groups of States (isn’t this exactly what the Western/Indian envoys, Western/Indian press, Western/Indian think tanks, HR organizations & Western/Indian controlled monetary organizations are doing to Sri Lanka) 
11.            N) States from refrain from organizing, training, financing & arming political & ethnic groups on their territories or the territories of other States for the purpose of creating subversion, disorder or unrest (this is what India committed, we have forgiven but not forgotten which is why we are always distrustful of India’s actions & we have every right to be too) 

Point III d) gives the right & duty to States to combat, within their constitutional prerogatives, the dissemination of false or distorted news which can be interpreted as interference in the internal affairs of other States or as being harmful to the promotion of peace, co-operation and friendly relations among States & nations.

Point III e) also gives right & duty to States not to recognize situations brought about by the threat or use of force or acts undertaken in contravention of the principle of non-intervention & non-interference. 

Alongside the principle of non-interference & non-intervention in domestic affaris of States is the violations being committed by foreign envoys also violating the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961) Article 41 which clearly denies foreign envoys to interfere in the internal affairs in the receiving country.


Article 4I – I. Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that State

Article 41 – 2. All official business with the receiving State entrusted to the mission by the sending State shall be conducted with or through the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the receiving State or such other Ministry as may be agreed. (how many instances of Western envoys & Indian envoys did as they liked in Sri Lanka?

In addition to the Vienna Convention, Article 2.7 of the Charter of the United Nations also provides that – Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state”

Having read the above declarations to which countries are bound by, please read the statements of the US – UK – EU and others on the situation in Sri Lanka and ask yourselves whether these statements not only qualify as violating the very principles of non-intervention & non-interference that countries have committed themselves to.


US State Department spokesman Robert Palladino told reporters,
It’s up to the parliament to decide who the prime minister is.”

We call on the president, in consultation with the speaker, to immediately reconvene parliament and allow the democratically elected representatives of the Sri Lankan people to fulfill their responsibilities to affirm who will lead their government,” 
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert

In another tweet on 7 November Heather Nauert
We urge #SriLanka’s President to reconvene parliament immediately to resolve the political crisis. Further delay compounds uncertainty in Sri Lanka, and undermines its international reputation and the aspirations of its people for good governance, stability and prosperity.

Stéphane Dujarric, Spokesman for the UN Secretary-General issues message on his behalf
“He calls on the Government to respect democratic values and constitutional provisions and process, uphold the rule of law and ensure the safety and security of all Sri Lankans.”

Another message issued from his office stated
“to revert to parliamentary procedures and allow the parliament to vote as soon as possible”


We expect the Government of Sri Lanka to uphold its Geneva commitments to human rights, reform, accountability, justice and reconciliation,’ 
tweet by Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs of the US Department of State

US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Alaina B. Teplitz tweeted after meeting the Speaker “These democratic institutions should serve the people of #SriLanka; let the elected representatives have their say,”

Neoliberal & former US official Samanthan Powers in a tweet
The dangers of #SriLanka constitutional crisis are clear: violence is possible & Rajapaksa’s return to power ”will likely end flagging efforts at ethnic reconciliation.” Where is US diplomacy? SL must know suspending aid, targeted sanctions on the table
Joining in is Australia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Ms Payne whose statement
We urge all parties to respect the democratic will of Sri Lankans, as exercised through their elected representatives. We encourage all parties to continue to resolve differences peacefully and refrain from confrontation and violence,” (democratic will of the citizens is directly exercised & outsourced to the President first & thereafter to Parliament)

Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs tweet
Norway following events in #SriLanka. FM #EriksenSoreide urges all parties to act in accordance w/ constitution, follow due institutional process and respect independence of institutions. All parties must refrain from violence and respect the freedom of media

Statement by the Embassy of Switzerland in Sri Lanka:
The Embassy of #Switzerland is closely following the recent events in #lka and in particular the announcement to prorogue @ParliamentLK. It calls on all parties to act in accordance with the Constitution

While China & Pakistan congratulated Mahinda Rajapakse on his appointment as Prime Minister, not surprisingly India which took part in the 2015 regime change of Rajapakse as President issues statement virtually echoing the gibberish coming out of Western embassy statements we hope that democratic values and constitutional process will be respected,”
Indian External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Raveesh Kumar

Mark Field Minister of State for Asia & Pacific UK
Following today’s developments in #SriLanka closely and with concern. We call for all parties and competent authorities to ensure that the constitution is respected and due political process followed

I have called on all parties to ensure that the constitution is respected and due political and legal process upheld. On October 29, I made a public statement urging the President, in consultation with the Speaker, to reconvene parliament immediately to give the democratically elected representatives of the Sri Lankan people their voice,

Mark Field has also added that UK recognized States & not Governments

Hugo Swire UK MP
Earlier this afternoon I questioned Foreign Secretary @Jeremy_Hunt about ongoing political situation in Sri Lanka. International community must press for the recall of Parliament to ensure due process regarding removal of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. #SriLanka

Chairman International Democrat Union Stephen Harper
We are witnessing the breakdown of democracy in Sri Lanka. This is disgraceful in that the government of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe has fought to preserve one of Asia’s oldest democratic systems, to uphold the rule of law, and to fight against corruption. The lawful government of Prime Minister Wickremesinghe must be restored without further delay.” (This is nothing to be surprised over Ranil Wickremasinghe is the Vice President of IDU Asia)

Pratyush Rao lead analyst for India & South Asia at Control Risks calls it a
“a constitutional crisis,” Is he providing Control Risks the proper legal stand or is the intent to create a notion of constitutional crisis!

Shailesh Kumar, South Asia director at Eurasia Group says
“Investors will likely view the developments with concern because at best, it will limit the scope for economic policy/reforms, and at worst plunge the country into a prolonged political crisis,” – Sri Lanka may need investments but not at the cost of selling land freehold to foreigners & getting nothing out of it. We see no economic benefit to our people.

Going to the extent of even issuing travel advisories 

You should exercise vigilance and avoid all demonstrations or large political gatherings. We will continue to monitor and update Travel Advice as appropriate,” 
the UK Foreign Office advised British citizens.


Gro Harlem Brundtland, Acting Chair of The Elders and former Prime Minister of Norway, said:
Sri Lanka is facing an unprecedented constitutional crisis which must be urgently resolved by peaceful and legal means. The country has suffered so much from years of conflict and human rights abuses, and cannot afford reckless political manoeuvres. I urge President Sirisena to act in the interest of all Sri Lankans by respecting democracy and constitutional norms.”

Human Rights Watch
Rajapaksa’s return to high office without any justice for past crimes raises chilling concerns for human rights in Sri Lanka,” said Brad Adams, Asia director.
Wonder where these entities were in 1980s/1990s when UNP & JVP were killing thousands & none of these deaths are demanded accountability! And these dead actually have names & details unlike the nameless figures being alleged against Rajapakse.

Human rights must not become a casualty of Sri Lanka’s political crisis. The authorities must ensure that key freedoms are respected and protected at this time. People should be allowed to exercise their rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association.”
Minar Pimple, Senior Director Amnesty International
It’s very strange that Amnesty International has not issued any statement against Ranil Wickremasinghe’s Minister’s personal security who shot & killed a civilian immediately after the sacking of Ranil as PM.


As anyone can see from the clauses that countries are meant to respect & the manner powerful countries are flouting them, the tremendous pressures that Sri Lanka has to weather. Is it a wonder that the citizens are realizing these diplomatic coercions now taking place & realize that they need to now more than ever defend not only their Nation, their territory, sovereignty, their natural resources & assets as well as the safety of their citizens.

Every country flouting the UN declarations & the resolutions that necessitates them to abide & respect the clauses undermine their right to make demands on Sri Lanka. We can only say that these countries many of whom are former colonial power houses & have a history of bloodied hands by interfering, occupying, plundering nations & murdering natives must be finding it difficult to give up old practices.




Shenali D Waduge