The cry of “never again,” raised by so many in the years after the end of the Holocaust 1945, has rung increasingly hollow with the passing decades, Kofi Annan, former secretary general of the United Nations, protested in an op-ed Friday in the International Herald Tribune. “The Holocaust remains unique … but instances of genocide and large-scale brutality have continued to multiply — from Cambodia to the Congo, from Bosnia to Rwanda, from Sri Lanka to Sudan,” he said. “It is surprisingly hard to find education programs that have clearly succeeded in linking the history of the Holocaust with the prevention of ethnic conflict and genocide in today’s world.”

Mr. Annan is honorary president of the advisory board for the Holocaust Education and Genocide Prevention Program at the Salzburg Global Seminar

The full text of his op-ed, titled “Myth of ‘never again’”, follows:

Many countries in Europe and North America now require all high-school pupils to learn about the Holocaust. Why? Because of its historical importance, of course, but also because, in our increasingly diverse and globalized world, educators and policy-makers believe Holocaust education is a vital mechanism for teaching students to value democracy and human rights, and encouraging them to oppose racism and promote tolerance in their own societies.

That was certainly my assumption in 2005 when, as U.N. secretary general, I urged the General Assembly to pass a resolution on Holocaust Remembrance, which included a call for “measures to mobilize civil society for Holocaust remembrance and education, in order to help to prevent future acts of genocide.”

Indeed it might seem almost self-evident that Holocaust education would have that purpose, and that effect. Yet it is surprisingly hard to find education programs that have clearly succeeded in linking the history of the Holocaust with the prevention of ethnic conflict and genocide in today’s world.

Of course, prevention is always difficult to prove. But the least one can say is that the cry of “never again,” raised by so many in the years after 1945, has rung increasingly hollow with the passing decades. The Holocaust remains unique in its combination of sophisticated technical and organizational means with the most ruthlessly vicious of ends, but instances of genocide and large-scale brutality have continued to multiply — from Cambodia to the Congo, from Bosnia to Rwanda, from Sri Lanka to Sudan.

Few countries at present, even among those that require their teachers to teach the Holocaust, give them any specific training or guidance on how to do so. And few teachers in any country have the knowledge or skills to teach the Holocaust in a way that would enable today’s adolescents, who often represent within a single classroom a wide variety of ethnic and cultural backgrounds, to relate it to the tensions they encounter in their own lives. More and better teacher training is surely needed.

But do we know what the content of that training should be?

If our goal in teaching students about the Holocaust is to make them think harder about civic responsibility, human rights and the dangers of racism, then presumably we need to connect the Holocaust with other instances of genocide, and with ethnic conflicts or tensions in our own time and place. That would enable students not only to learn about the Holocaust, but also to learn important lessons from it.

The time has surely come to ask some hard questions about “traditional” Holocaust education, and perhaps to rethink some of the assumptions on which it has been based. Are programs focusing on the Nazi system and ideology, and particularly on the horrendous experience of their millions of victims, an effective response to, or prophylactic against, the challenges we face today?

It is easy to identify with the victims. But if we want to prevent future genocides, is it not equally important to understand the psychology of the perpetrators and bystanders — to comprehend what it is that leads large numbers of people, often “normal” and decent in the company of their own family and friends, to suppress their natural human empathy with people belonging to other groups and to join in, or stand by and witness, their systematic extermination? Do we not need to focus more on the social and psychological factors that lead to these acts of brutality and indifference, so that we know the warning signs to look out for in ourselves and our societies?

Do current education programs do enough to reveal the dangers inherent in racial or religious stereotypes and prejudices, and to inoculate students against them? Does the teaching of the history of the Holocaust at classroom level sufficiently link it to the root causes of contemporary racism or ethnic conflict? And shouldn’t the Holocaust be studied not only in Europe, North America and Israel but throughout the world, alongside other tragic instances of human barbarism?

Such questions will be at the heart of a conference this month at the Salzburg Global Seminar, in Austria, on “The Global Prevention of Genocide: Learning from the Holocaust,” held in cooperation with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Organizers hope this will lead to an annual program for teachers from around the world.

This is certainly not a problem with a “one size fits all” solution. Teaching the Holocaust to a class in Ukraine is obviously different from teaching it in Israel, and indeed is likely to vary widely even between different districts of a European city. But insights and examples can surely be shared with advantage, and it seems fitting that Austria — which provided both victims and perpetrators of Nazi atrocities in abundance — should be hosting such a program.

Similar to the Sinhalicisation of Trincomalee, the capital of the East, Colombo plans for a new, Sinhalicised capital for the North at Kilinochchi, administrative sources working for Colombo on the project said.

Kilinochchi is being prepared for that with an extensive military cantonment with permanent houses for military personnel, cultivation lands for them, an airstrip at Iranaimadu, new Buddhist temples and by not allowing the local population to their lands.

For every three people there is one military personnel at present. When resettled, the local Tamils will be herded into pockets and there will be a new population, considerably Sinhalicised, the sources said adding that with the completion of the plot, there won’t be even one city or administrative centre existing for Tamils in the island.

Colombo announced Thursday that its decision to hold cabinet meetings at provincial level will be first demonstrated at Kilinochchi, next month.

Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s army commander Jagath Jayasuriya and other military top brass who visited the Buddhist prelate of the Mahasangha’s Asgiriya Chapter, assured him that the establishment of permanent camps for security forces in the ‘liberated North and East’ were well in progress, The Island said Saturday.

The farms and land, which were under the LTTE, were now taken over by the government and were made use of for ‘development’ projects, the army chief told the Mahanayaka Thero adding that the security forces in the permanent camps are provided with all the basic facilities to make life comfortable for them.

According to Sri Lanka Army website, the SLA Commander told both the prelates of the Malwatte and Asgiriya chapters of Maha Sangha that "army personnel arriving in those areas for duty are to be provided permanent houses and allowed to engage in cultivation work if they so desire. A large segment of the Army, including the Engineer Services are constructing highways, bridges, houses, factories, etc in those areas and this will save a lot of money for the government."

The prelate, pleased with what is going on in the North and East, stressed on maximum facilities to the forces of occupation and told the army commander of the need to protect the country’s land from ‘several other groups’ that are funded by foreign countries to purchase land and expand their population in the island.

Having permanent houses, cultivation lands and seeking women to have progeny, Sri Lanka will be having a new kind of 'ethnicised army' of colonisation in the Tamil homeland, concerned Tamil circles commented.

This is what the 'political solution' enacted by the powers and 'Strategic Partners' by tilting the security balance of Tamils, they further said.

The redevelopment of the North is a major focus of all international efforts to rebuild Sri Lanka now that the war has been deemed over, but the Sri Lankan approach to development has been the also termed exploitation.

The resources of the North are being exported to enrich the south, at the expense of the Tamils, reports of activities from the region said.

The Manniththalai sandbar is being demolished as sand from the region is exported, to the benefit of Sinhalese operators from the South.

Manniththalai, a roughly 25 km long sandbar, extends towards the Jaffna Peninsula from Poonakari in the main island.It was a major route of communication between the Peninsula and the main island since ancient times until early 19th century and is dotted with archaeological remains ranging from microlithic / megalithic times to the times of the Dutch, covered by huge sand dunes.

As sand deposits in the Jaffna peninsula in places such as Mankumpaan, Ariyaalai, Manatkaadu are depleted the Manniththalai sandbar is targeted now, reports suggested.

Each lorry load of sand costing 11,000 rupees is sold for 44,000 in the black market. As an average, 40 lorries are engaged each day in the business in the Manatkaadu in Vadamaraadchi.

In early June, Namal Rajapaksa, son of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, along with a Hindi film actor Vivek Oberoi and Minister Douglas Devananda, visited the sandbar, and announced the opening of a communication route through the sandbar.

Namal Rajapaksa is keen in generating income through ferry services to the sandbar, earlier news reports said. He is also now deligated to receive all illegal income locally generated in Vanni.

The sand trade in Jaffna is dominated by a leading businessman associated with Douglas Devananda.

In addition to sand, pre-historic layers of gravel deposits in the Vanni region are also scooped out indiscriminately. The natural resources indiscriminately exploited are also used in the 'construction' works of the Sri Lankan military in Vanni and in Vavuniya, TamilNet reported.

Meanwhile, limestone quarried in the Jaffna peninsula, seriously threatening the groundwater and environment, is sent to the cement factory in Galle in the South.

Threatening the entire groundwater and fragile ecology of Jaffna peninsula, a private Sinhalese company is engaged in the illegal excavation of limestone in the High Security Zone (HSZ) in Valikaamam North while the Rajapaksa government refuses to reveal details of this enterprise.

This is occurring in the area from Maaviddapuram to Keerimalai where the uprooted residents have not been allowed to resettle for the past twenty years.

The indiscriminate excavation of limestone in a 4 sq km area at depths of nearly 40 feet has already caused seepage of sea water and it is feared the area is becoming submerged, press reports said.

The Jaffna Peninsula depends largely on the limestone bed for the preservation of rainwater into groundwater.

The underground channels that bring in freshwater to the innumerable aquifers of the peninsula, have an underneath entry into sea adjacent to the locality of the quarries and indiscriminate quarrying and the possibility of seawater coming inside can affect the potable water of the masses.

Reports suggest that 30 percent of the groundwater in the peninsula has become saline in recent times due to various reasons.

A private company, ‘V. V. Karunaratne’ from the South, has installed heavy machinery including crushers in the above militarised HSZ where limestone is dug out, crushed and sent to a cement factory in Galle in South.

Hundreds of Southern Sinhalese labourers are engaged in excavating lime stone in Valikaamam North where its residents had been evicted by SLA, Jaffna MP, Appathurai Vinayagamoorthy who visited the place said in a press meet held in Jaffna 27 May 2010.

The excavated limestone is taken to the cement factories in Galle in ships and via A9 road.

The following are the conditions set by the European Commission for a 6 month extension of the GSP+ benefit to Sri Lanka, with the proviso that Sri Lanka had to provide written commitment to these conditions by July 1.

1.) Reduction of the number of derogations to the ICCPR.

2.) Take steps to ensure that the key objective of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, namely to provide for independent and impartial appointments to the key public positions, is fully safeguarded, including through a Constitutional Council which adequately reflects the interests of all political, ethnic and religious groups and minorities within Sri Lankan society.

3.) Repeal of the remaining part of the 2005 Emergency Regulations, notably those Regulations concerning detention without trial, restrictions on freedom of movement, ouster of jurisdiction and immunity and repeal of 2006 Emergency Regulations (Gazette No. 1474/5/2006). If GoSL considers that it is essential to retain certain provisions which are compatible with the ICCPR or UNCAT, such as provisions concerning possession of weapons, such provisions should be transferred to the Criminal Code.

4.) Repeal of those sections of the Prevention of Terrorism Act which are incompatible with the ICCPR (in particular, sections 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16 and 26) or amendment so as to make them clearly compatible with the ICCPR.

5.) Repeal of the ouster clause in section 8 and the immunity clause in section 9 of the Public Security Ordinance or amendment or as to make it clearly compatible with the ICCPR.

6.) Adoption of the planed amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provide for the right of a suspect to see a lawyer immediately following his arrest.

7.) Legislative steps necessary to allow individuals to submit complaints to the UN Human Rights Committee under the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR and to the UN Committee against Torture under Article 22.

8.) Steps to implement outstanding opinions of the UN Human Rights Committee in individual cases.

9.) Extension of an invitation to the following Special Procedures who have requested to visit Sri Lanka (UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances, UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers).

10.) Responses to a significant number of individual cases currently pending before the UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances.

11.) Publication of the complete final report of the 2008 Commission of Enquiry.

12.) Publication or making available to the family members a list of the former LTTE combatants currently held in detention as well as all other persons detained under the Emergency Regulations. Decisive steps to bring to an end the detention of any persons under the Emergency Regulations either by releasing them or by bringing them to trial.

13.)  Granting of access to all places of detention for monitoring purposes to an independent humanitarian organization, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross.

14.) Adoption of the National human Rights Action Plan by Parliament and its prompt implementation.

15.)  Take steps to ensure journalists can exercise their professional duties without harassment.

An early historic inscription in Tamil language and in Tamil Brahmi script, dateable to c.200 BCE, has been found in the archaeological excavations by a German team at Tissamaharama in the south of the island of Sri Lanka.

The inscription deciphered by I. Mahadevan as ‘Thira’li Mu’ri,’ which means ‘written agreement of the assembly,’ was incised on an early historic Black and Red Ware pottery.

The last letter of the inscription, which is retroflex Tamil ‘Ri’, is very clearly a Tamil phoneme in Tamil Brahmi script, academics commented. The Tamil Brahmi inscription is also found mixed with megalithic or early historic graffiti marks, which were probably the symbols of the guild, they further said.

Tissamaharama or ancient Mahaagama is located close to Kathirkaamam (Kataragama), a famous pilgrim centre for Tamils as well as Sinhalese.

Prakrit and Tamil were the earliest written languages of South Asia. The first evidences in these languages, in phonetic writing, appear from c.3rd century BCE.

Sinhala as an identifiable language appears in inscriptions from c. 8– 9th century CE onwards.

The following is what Iravatham Mahadevan, doyen of the study of Tamil Brahmi, wrote on Tissamaharama potsherd inscription in The Hindu, Thursday:

“Tamils have been living in the northern and eastern parts of the island from time immemorial. Several small fragments of pottery with a few Tamil‐Brahmi letters scratched on them have been found from the Jaffna region. However, a much more sensational discovery is a pottery inscription from an excavation conducted at Tissamaharama on the southeastern coast of Sri Lanka. A fragment of a high‐quality black and red‐ ware flat dish inscribed in Tamil in the Tamil‐Brahmi script was found in the earliest layer. It was provisionally dated to around 200 BCE by German scholars who undertook the excavation. The inscription reads tiraLi muRi, which means “written agreement of the assembly” The inscription bears testimony to the presence in southern Sri Lanka of a local Tamil mercantile community organised in a guild to conduct maritime trade as early as at the close of the 3rd century BCE”.

Writing on “An Epigraphic perspective on the Antiquity of Tamil.” Mahadevan cited the American scholar Thomas Trautmann and said: “The three ‘fundamental discoveries’ in indological studies are the discovery of the Indo-European language family (1786); the discovery of the Dravidian language family (1816), and the discovery of the Indus civilization (1924). It is significant that two of the three ‘fundamental discoveries’ relate to the Dravidian, though the latest one is still being ‘debated’ for want of an acceptable decipherment of the Indus Script.”

Mahadevan continues: “Part of the problem in the delayed recognition accorded to Tamil in Indological studies was the non‐availability of really old literary texts and archaeological evidence for the existence of Tamil civilisation in ancient times. The critical editions of the earliest Tamil literary works of the Sangam Age, especially by U.V. Swaminathaiyar from 1887, have led to a radical reassessment of the antiquity and historicity of Tamil civilisation. What Swaminathiyar did for Tamil literature, K.V. Subrahmanya Aiyer accomplished for Tamil epigraphy. He demonstrated (in 1924) that Tamil (and not Prakrit) was the language of the cave inscriptions of Tamil Nadu..”

Eelam Tamil academics sadly commenting on the repeated assertions of Mahadevan in giving exclusive credit to Swaminathaiyar for the publication of Changkam literature and not giving due credit to the efforts of Eelam Tamils, said scholars from Jaffna did the pioneering work decades before Swaminathaiyar.

The first ever Changkam text that saw the light of print was Thirumurukaattuppadai of Paththuppaaddu (one of The Ten Idylls), which was brought out by Arumuga Navalar of Jaffna in 1851.

The first of the Eight Anthologies (Edduththokai) of the Changkam classics that got printed was Kaliththokai (1887). This was brought out by C.W. Thamotharam Pillai of Jaffna, who was an old student of the Jaffna College and was a first graduate of the University of Madras.

Swaminathaiyar brought out his first edition of the Changkam classics Paththuppaaddu in 1889.

Earlier to bringing out Kaliththokai, Thamotharam Pillai started publishing post-Changkam classics such as Choo'laama'ni, Tholkaappiyam etc right from 1860's.

The book of V. Kanagasabai Pillai of Trincomalee, The Tamils 1800 Years Ago (1904), was the first major historical and social study on the Changkam Age, based on the classics.

The pioneering work of translating the Changkam classics into English, bringing the text to non-Tamil readers, was also done by Eelam Tamil scholars.

J V Chellaiah of Jaffna College did the entire translation of Paththuppaaddu in 1945. This was decades before A K Ramanujan or Hart translating parts of the Eight Anthologies.

Swami Vipulanandar of Batticaloa who made arrangement for the publication of Chellaiah’s translation painfully notes how the then Madras government or the Annamalai university didn’t give any help to the venture even though they admired the translation, and how he finally brought it out as a publication of the government press of then British Ceylon.  

The recent news that foreign governments are seeking to establish an official presence in Jaffna is to be welcomed. India has sought to open a consulate while the United States has indicated plans to establish an ‘American Corner’ on the peninsula. Given the size and importance of the British Tamil Diaspora it is now imperative that Britain also works to establish an office in Jaffna with visa processing facilities.

Britain is home to one of the most established and flourishing centres of the global Tamil Diaspora. The British Tamil Diaspora is well integrated into its host country but maintains important familial and political connections to the homeland. There is a constant flow of people between the Tamil areas and Britain for family re-unions, visits and for study and business.

A British office in Jaffna would hugely facilitate this flow and would also stimulate the development of the Tamil homeland by re-establishing connections between the Tamil speaking areas and global flows of culture, trade and people. At present, Tamils are compelled to travel to Colombo and face expenditure while risking arbitrary arrest and extortion merely to arrange travel overseas.

An official presence in Jaffna would ease the process of overseas travel and could also work to support British Tamils visiting their homeland. This need not be a burden to British tax payers as the costs of maintaining the office could easily be met by the volume of visa processing fees.

The opening up of direct connections between Jaffna and the world is also important to breaking Colombo’s asphyxiating control of the Tamil speaking areas.

Although the Rajapaksa regime repeatedly parrots its commitment to ‘development’ in the Tamil areas, it places huge restrictions on the free movement of goods, people and information between the Tamil areas and the world. While demanding ‘development’ funding for ‘reconstruction’ and ‘rehabilitation’ in the Northeast, the Sri Lankan government continues to insist that development and investment flows centrally through Colombo.

The Rajapaksa’s stance is not novel; it’s a continuation of the ‘development’ policies followed by all previous Sinhala governments towards the Tamil speaking areas.

Historically Sri Lanka’s ‘development policy’ towards the Tamil homeland has involved more or less successful attempts to coercively erase the north east’s Tamil cultural and demographic identity using large scale and internationally funded infrastructure and colonisation projects. At the same time Colombo has deployed its centralised planning and licensing policies in an effort to stifle Tamil economic activity and channel it into a subordinate and dependent position within a Colombo and Sinhala centric logic.

The Rajapaksa regime is no different in its ambitions but it is operating within a very different global environment. There is no longer any international interest that is served by supporting Colombo’s centralised and ethno centric Sinhala Buddhist development vision. It is unlikely that Colombo will be able to find generous donors willing to subsidise for years to come the economically unprofitable and politically counterproductive colonisation of Tamil land by Buddhist monks and the Sinhala urban and rural poor.

At the same time the past decades of anti Tamil oppression have also fuelled Tamil emigration and produced the global Tamil Diaspora. In an important sense the very existence of the Tamil Diaspora has re-opened the Tamil homeland’s economic and political connections to the outside world that post independence Sinhala governments sought to destroy. Much to Colombo’s evident frustration, the Tamil Diaspora exists beyond the long arm of Sinhala oppression and has its own ideas about the development of the Tamil homeland.

During the Norwegian peace process the Tamil Diaspora more than amply demonstrated its commitment to the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the north-east. The Rajapaksa regime would like to discipline and harness the Diaspora’s energies and resources in support of its own Sinhala Buddhist vision. Having slaughtered tens of thousands of Tamils and reduced to rubble the Diaspora supported development of the Vanni, the Rajapaksa regime now demands that the Tamil Diaspora steps forward and shells out to support Colombo’s development plans.

While this type of extortion might have worked in the economic climate of the cold war world, it is no longer structurally feasible. Sri Lanka’s attempt to maintain an economic, social and cultural monopoly of the north-east is fiscally and politically unsustainable.

The Tamil homeland will over time recover its economic, cultural and social links with the rest of the world. The British Tamil Diaspora can facilitate this process by working to establish an official British presence in the Jaffna peninsula.

A politically sustainable and economically sound development of the resources and capacities of the northeast must now involve an opening up of the region to global flows that can tap the Tamil Diaspora’s considerable reserves of finance, political commitment and knowhow. A connection with Britain is an important economic and political component of this process.

Sri Lanka has refused to comply with European Union conditions for the extending of GSP+ trade concessions, calling them ‘insulting’.

The EU had called on Sri Lanka to provide written confirmation by July 1 that the country was willing to comply with 15 human rights related conditions in order for the trade concessions to be extended by another 6 months.

Sri Lanka criticised the EU's warning to withdraw the trade benefits, with the foreign ministry in Colombo complaining that Europe was setting "unattainable targets".

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa is reported to have rejected the demand at a Cabinet meeting, saying he would not compromise the country’s sovereignty for the sake of the US$ 150 million by which amount the country would benefit under the GSP + facility, reported the Daily Mirror.   

The President stated that the EU had no right to interfere in the matters of a sovereign state, reported the Sunday Leader.

He is reported to have declared the conditions to be related to “internal political matters” with “no relevance whatsoever to international trade”. 

"This is more dictatorial than how the colonial rulers of the past treated us," said Economic Development Minister and Senior Presidential Advisor Basil Rajapaksa.

"We cannot be bullied into submission. We can stand on our own and resist these conditions," he told the Sunday Times.

The President was also quoted as having told the Cabinet that Sri Lanka does not need the GSP+ concession, even though it is estimated that 100,000 workers will be directly affected if the agreement is not extended.

External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris echoed the President’s reassurance that Sri Lanka could manage without the concession. “The garment industry is strong. When the quota period ended, many speculated that this would be the end of the industry. But, we were resilient. We have creativity and entrepreneurship; the resilience to adapt and create ways in which we can increase productivity and revenue,” he told a press conference.

Government spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella said the government would arrange an alternate scheme to ensure Sri Lankan exporters do not lose competitiveness.

Peiris also informed a press meet that it was not the role of the EU to interfere in the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and that the country cannot accept the conditions put forward by the EU.

“To fulfill the conditions they are asking of us, we would have to change the constitution and brush aside the decisions of the highest court in the country,” he was quoted by the Sunday Leader as saying. “We cannot surrender our decision making power to a foreign government. I don’t think even the public will agree to this or ask us to fulfil these conditions”.

"These conditions are unacceptable. They are an insult to every citizen of this country," Rambukwella told reporters in Colombo. "We must put the EU demand in the dustbin."

The EU wanted Sri Lanka to relax some of the provisions of its draconian Prevention of Terrorism law, which was not possible, AFP quoted Rambukwella as saying. He reportedly added that the EU conditions affected internal security.

Peiris reportedly told the Sri Lankan Cabinet that Denmark and Spain took a rigid stand against Sri Lanka while Italy supported the country on this issue at the EU, the Daily Mirror said.

According to the paper, the German Ambassador and the British High Commissioner had informed Peiris that their countries were not in favour of the EU decision. 

Initially, media reports in Sri Lanka, citing government sources, in mid June claimed that the European Union had agreed to extend the GSP+ tariff concessions for a further 6 months beyond the initial cancellation date of August 15.

The reports drew a strong response from the EU, which said, "contrary to these articles, the date of 15 August on which Sri Lanka would cease to benefit from GSP Plus will not be extended unconditionally."

The EU's executive arm, the European Commission, insisted on "significant improvements on the effective implementation of the human rights conventions" for the island to continue enjoying the trade benefits.

Sri Lanka had sent two senior delegations to Brussels in March and May this year to try and negotiate the EU decision to withdraw the GSP+ concessions. While the delegations had had several meetings with EU representatives, they were unable to get the decision changed.

Following the delegations, EC Vice President Catherine Ashton wrote a two page letter to Peiris, saying "……following an assessment of the meeting with Attorney General Peiris on May 20-21 and of the further information which your Government has supplied, it is not yet possible to conclude that Sri Lanka is, at this time, effectively implementing the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the UN Convention against Torture."

The letter adds, "The European Commission notes the clear willingness on the part of Sri Lanka to take further additional steps to address without delay outstanding human rights issues and stands ready to work with you on this. We are prepared to propose to the Council of the European Union that it decides to maintain GSP Plus preferences for a limited additional period subject to a clear commitment by your Government to undertake the actions listed in the annexe to this letter within a six months time frame beginning July of this year.

The Generalised System of Preference (GSP) is a trade agreement in which the European Union gives 176 countries and territories, preferential access to the EU market.

By reducing the tariff on goods entering the market, the EU’s main priority is to reduce poverty and promote sustainable development and good governance. There is no expectation or requirement that this form of access is reciprocated.

Under GSP+, Sri Lanka receives, among 15 other countries, additional benefits, which can be withdrawn if the EU finds that the country does not respect the criteria for eligibility.

The agreement, which is subject to renewal every three years, places emphasis on human rights and labour laws within the country.

Sri Lanka has hugely benefited by the opportunities offered by GSP+, especially in the clothing and fisheries sector. In 2008, the imports to EU from Sri Lanka totalled 1.24 billion Euros.  

Sri Lanka gains about 150 million dollars annually due to preferential tariffs, according to business estimates.

These benefits will be withdrawn on August 15 unless Sri Lanka makes a written commitment by July 1, according to the EU. 

With thousands of war affected civilians still without livelihood and an economy still reeling from the aftermath of a decades-long conflict in Sri Lanka’s northern region, plans should be in place to revive local economies and jobs, says a top United Nations official.

"There needs to be a strategic plan to bring in industries, infrastructure development, investments and jobs into these areas devastated by war," Kandeh Yumkella, director general of the U.N. Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), told IPS during his visit to the South Asian country in early June.

UNIDO is a specialised agency of the U.N. mandated to promote sustainable industrial development.

"All the agencies and government bodies involved in developing and assisting the war affected region have understood how important this is. I am confident that it will be in place. We don’t have much time – this has to begin now," Yumkella assures.

Yumkella, who hails from Sierra Leone, says the experience of his own country in West Africa, which was devastated by an 11-year civil strife that ended in 2002, has shown the vital role economic empowerment plays in post-conflict recovery.

Generating much needed income for Sri Lanka’s war ravaged northern region is now an integral part of the recovery programme being spearheaded by the government and donor states, says Yumkella, who met with high- ranking government officials, including Prime Minister D. M. Jayarathna, to discuss the potential industrialisation of northern Sri Lanka.

A bloody civil conflict with the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) has left the north devastated and devoid of any major industries or investments. The conflict ended in May 2009, when the LTTE, who had fought for an independent state for the island’s Tamils, were defeated by government forces.

The last phase of the war forced over 280,000 to flee their homes and end up in welfare camps. Since late last year, tens of thousands of the displaced civilians have returned to their homes.

According to the U.N. over 214,000 civilians have either returned to their homes or are living with host families. Around 76,000 still remain in the camps set up for the displaced. The government has earlier announced plans to resettle them by August this year.

UNIDO is already assisting a livelihood recovery programme in the north and east of Sri Lanka, funded by a two million U.S. dollar grant from Japan, says Yumkella. He adds that his agency would begin a new assistance programme to provide jobs to at least 40,000 war widows in the country’s conflict-torn region.

"We have to make these areas attractive for private investments, give hope to the younger generation, the widows, the child soldiers," says Yumkella. "The next two years will be very important."

Yumkella warns that if income generation opportunities do not increase in the former conflict zone, frustrations are likely to intensify. "We have to work really hard in the next five years to fulfil the hopes in these people who have survived so much," he declares.

War affected individuals who have returned to their homes share Yumkella’s view that jobs are crucial in the erstwhile war zone.

Nagarangan Kalaiamuda, 27, is desperate for any kind of work. A native of Puliyankulam, just south of Kilinochchi town, the former administrative hub of the Tigers, she lives in a 10-by-5-foot mud hut with her two young children. Her husband is in government custody for suspected links with the Tigers.

"I find some kind of work, like helping a family that has just returned home or helping an (aid) agency with some work. But I don’t have any permanent work," she told IPS. She makes about 200 Sri Lankan rupees (about 1.76 dollars) a day when she finds work. But this means she must leave her two children with her neighbours, who are war returnees like her.

Each returning family gets 25,000 rupees (220 dollars) from the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and food rations for six months from the World Food Programme.

"The assistance helps, but without jobs, we will not be able to build our houses or do other things that are essential," Kalaiamuda says.

Anton Gunadayalan, a local official, fears income generation would take sometime. "People have just started to come back; it will take some time for things to revert to normal," he says.

Gunadayalan, who is in charge of issuing construction permits in the Puliyankulam area, adds that when the reconstruction of houses and other buildings begins, there could be more employment opportunities. "There are no houses standing, so we have to rebuild everything – that is a lot of work," he says.

The U.N. estimates that at least 160,000 houses need to be rebuilt in the former war zone commonly known as the Vanni. Economists have observed that one other possible way to jumpstart the Vanni economy is to revitalise agriculture and fisheries, which accounted for over 30 percent of the pre-war regional economy.

Economist Muttukrishna Sarvananthan, who runs the Point Pedro Development Institute, a non-governmental social research outfit based in the northern Jaffna peninsula, believes it is not aid but private investments that can rejuvenate the Vanni economy.

"What Sri Lanka requires is not a ‘Marshall Plan’ of any sort. Instead, what we require is entrepreneurial capitalism. Enterprises of modest scale, as opposed to donor or government funded grandiose projects, could contribute to substantive and enduring growth," he says. 

October 2008-2009 – EU investigates Sri Lanka’s commitment to the human rights requirements to receive GSP+ trade concessions and finds that the country had significant shortcomings with regard to three covenants; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention against Torture (CAT) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). These three, among 27 international conventions are essential qualifying criteria for GSP+.

February 2010 – EU member states decide to withdraw GSP+ for Sri Lanka stating that the country had not followed through with three UN human rights conventions that were relevant to receive benefits from the scheme.

March 2010 – Sri Lanka sends a delegation to Brussels to negotiate the GSP+ withdrawal

May 2010 – The senior Sri Lankan delegation, including P. B. Jayasundara, Romesh Jayasinghe and Mohan Peiris, makes a second visit to Brussels and has several meetings with EU representatives.

17 June 2010 – Lady Katherine Ashton (EU’s Foreign Policy Commissioner) sends Sri Lanka a letter stating that the GSP+ concession could be extended for an additional 6 months, subject to a clear, written commitment by the Sri Lankan Government to carry out the 15 conditions attached to the letter.

23 June 2010 – Sri Lankan Cabinet unequivocally rejects EU conditions in reports to the media 

AUSTRALIAN of the Year Patrick McGorry has called for the asylum seeker issue to be taken out of the coming federal election and replaced by a return to a bipartisan approach.

Professor McGorry, a psychiatrist, said he was one of a group in the late 1980s that established the first system of care for refugees who were victims of trauma and torture.

''Both sides of politics were very supportive of this welcoming approach and Australia was one of the countries that was leading the way on this issues back in the 1980s,'' he said.

It now had a situation of bipartisan bullying, he said.

He told about 2000 supporters at a World Refugee Day rally in Melbourne: ''This election, it won't be won or lost on the issue of asylum seekers.''

He said people should vote on economic issues, the health system and mental health.

''Mental health is really a huge issue that needs support and obviously refugees and asylum seekers need to be part of that whole process.''

Sri Lankan Aran Mylvaganam, 26, told refugee supporters who marched to Fitzroy Town Hall that he was 11 when in 1995, he saw the bombing of his school in Jaffna by the Sir Lankan Army and the killing of 72 Tamil school children and the wounding of more than 200.

''On that day my 14-year-old brother was cut into half and murdered in cold blood by the Sri Lankan Army,'' he said.

That same day, he came upon his close friend, ''hanging from the tamarind tree by his intestines''.

In 1997, aged 13, he came to Australian on his own and spent three months in detention.

He was treated for depression. For three years the Immigration Department refused to admit his parents until, under pressure from doctors and welfare bodies, it relented.

Mr Mylvaganam, a finance officer, told The Age, his parents arrived in 2000 but he continued to be depressed until 2006.

''The effects of war don't go away even when you have your parents,'' he said.

He said the situation facing Tamils in Sri Lanka today was much worse today than when he was there in 1996. More than 2000 youths being held as suspected Tamil Tiger supporters, faced torture.

Every day, young girls and boys disappeared at the hands of government-supported paramilitaries, he said.

''How can Australia say it is safe for refugees to return?'' he said.