With news emerging that Sri Lanka may still be able to hold on to the GSP+ concessions, EU Ambassador to Sri Lanka Bernard Savage warned that there are still issues to be overcome.

“I reiterate my position that Sri Lanka’s stand of non-cooperation is not going to be helpful,” said Savage, following an increasing sense of confidence in Sri Lanka, that they may retain the GSP+ benefits.

 “It is likely to be extended with a negative recommendation,” Reuters reported earlier, quoting a diplomat briefed on the EU’s internal discussions.

"There would then be some targets for Sri Lanka to meet," the anonymous source also added. 

Sri Lanka has twice refused to co-operate with the EU, whilst they were investigating the possibility of withdrawing the programme from the island.

When the EU tried to send a team to investigate allegations of human rights abuses in 2008, Sri Lanka refused to allow them entry into the country.

Colombo also refused to respond to a damning 130-page report by the EU detailing human rights abuses, which indicated a possible cancellation of the concession.

Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to EU and Belgium Ravinatha Ariyasinghe told the EU Parliament that “the government had not accepted the process of GSP+ investigation and a request for EU experts to visit Sri Lanka as a matter of principle, as it was felt inappropriate and unnecessary and the Government was not willing to compromise on its sovereignty.”

“The process of obtaining the concessions is well known to the Lankan government,” commented Mr Savage, adding “we wish Sri Lanka very well” in its bid to obtain the GSP+ concession.

There has been increased pressure on the EU to cease the GSP+ scheme to Sri Lanka.

The Economist criticised Sri Lanka’s participation in the concession scheme in the 3rd of September edition, whilst the Times newspaper also published a damning letter on their website.

The letter severely criticised the Sri Lankan Government stating that “it would be a flagrant abuse of the GSP Plus facility if the commission were to extend it under these conditions.”

It was signed by former director of the Catholic Overseas Development Charity (CAFOD) Julian Filochowski, Professor of Peace Studies at Coventry University Andrew Rigby, Senior Vice President of the Salzburg Global Seminar, former Director of Communications in the Executive Office of the UN and former lead writer for the Financial Times Edward Mortimer, former Secretary of State for International Development and current MP for Birmingham Ladywood Clare Short, and MP for Leeds West John Battle.

US group Tamils Against Genocide (TAG) also submitted a letter to the Chairperson of Human Rights Sub-commission of the European Union, calling for the EU to terminate the concession. The letter was supported by documents from Prof. Francis Boyle of the Illinois College of Law, the model indictment for genocide against Major Gen. Fonseka and Sri Lanka's Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse, and court documents filed against IMF loan to Sri Lanka.

"If the EU were to continue its preferential tariff arrangement for Sri Lanka, it would be actively facilitating and supporting Sri Lanka in its crimes, and funding the forced detention of civilians, the expansion of the oppressive security apparatus, and the ethnic cleansing of traditional Tamil areas," stated TAG’s letter. 

Following these reports, the Sri Lankan Government has been working at full steam in order to try and secure the concession.

"The government is working on a National Action Plan to develop human rights and guarantee the rights of all Sri Lankans. This is in its draft stages," Mahinda Samarasinghe, Minister of Disaster Management & Human Rights said.

"The Action Plan will facilitate Sri Lanka’s commitments to secure (EU) GSP Plus (trade concessions) and other international commitments," continued Samarasinghe.

Opposition UNP MP Lakshman Kiriella alleged that the Rajapakse administration had even sent a delegation of religious leaders to the EU in order to try and plead for the concession to continue.

“The Government had boasted publicly that it would secure the concession without a problem but is secretly making a valiant effort to get it,” he added.

President Mahinda Rajapakse recently appointed a team of four ministers  to try and win over the EU and removed S Rannugge from his post as secretary in Sri Lanka`s Export Development and International Trade Ministry.

Rannugge had earlier commented that it was “very unlikely” that Sri Lanka would be able to keep the GSP+ concessions.

The Sunday Times reported that the Rajapakse administration would be willing to offer a subsidy to international garment buyers if GSP+ was lost.

“We will provide the difference between the earlier price and the new price. That means if a buyer has to pay an extra Rs 10 per piece, we will reimburse this amount,” the newspaper quoted one official as saying.

Sri Lanka’s textile industry netted a record $3.47 billion from EU markets last year, making it the country’s top source of foreign exchange. The EU is set to pass the final report on Sri Lanka and the GSP+ tariff to the Commissioners on October 15th. It will then be voted upon.

Andrew Stroehlein, International Crisis Group's Communications Director, during his testimony to the European Parliament Subcommittee on Human Rights on the situation in Sri Lanka Thursday, noted the poor and deteriorating conditions in the internment camps where more than 264,000 Tamils are being held by Colombo.

"The worst kind of duplicity was seen just a few weeks ago, when the [Sri Lanka] government announced it had released 10,000 displaced persons. In fact, we know at least 3,300 people had been moved from an internment camp to another detention facility," he said.

"Sri Lankan government has run out of excuses for continuing to keep these hundreds of thousands of innocent people prisoner," he added.

Full text of Stroehlein's testimony follows:

Thank you, Madam Chair, for offering Crisis Group the opportunity to present our assessment of the situation in Sri Lanka today.

Since the end of the war and the defeat of the terrorist Tamil Tigers, the government of Sri Lanka has been imprisoning without charge over a quarter of a million ethnic Tamils displaced by the conflict. The state has locked them in internment camps in the north of the country. The camps are surrounded by barbed wire, and as an incident just this past weekend in Vavuniya demonstrates, the Sri Lankan army will shoot at anyone who tries to escape.

Such restrictions on freedom in the absence of due process are a violation of both national and international law.

Conditions in the camps are poor and deteriorating. They are overcrowded, with medical facilities, access to clean water and sanitation all woefully inadequate. These conditions are expected to worsen dramatically with the onset of monsoon season. The military is preventing humanitarian organisations, including the UN and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), from undertaking effective monitoring and protection in the camps.

The government has made numerous promises to release those held in the main camps, but these are little more than attempts to deliberately mislead the international community. Very little has come of any of Colombo's pledges. The worst kind of duplicity was seen just a few weeks ago, when the government announced it had released 10,000 displaced persons. In fact, we know at least 3,300 people had been moved from an internment camp to another detention facility. (UNHCR press release, 29 September 2009)

Here are the numbers as we understand them today (as of 15 September, UNHCR with government figures). Of the estimated 289,000 internally displaced Tamils at the end of the war, some 10,000 are held in detention centres on suspicion of having links to the Tamil Tigers, about 5,000 have managed to buy their way out of the camps by paying off the right people, and only 6,000 have been resettled. Those in the main camps in the north number about 264,000.

The ICRC has not been able to visit the main camps in the north since July, and they have never been able to visit those in detention facilities who are accused of working with or for the Tigers.

The government claims two reasons for continuing to imprison over a quarter of a million internally displaced persons (IDPs), but neither argument holds up. First, they say demining must occur before people can be allowed back, but this is nonsense, as tens of thousands could be released immediately to live with host families now living in towns and villages free of mines.

Second, the government claims to be conducting a screening process to weed out Tamil Tigers from the 264,000 in the internment camps. But no one can tell you how this process is proceeding. The government itself will not say how many people have already been through the screening process, the ICRC has not been able to monitor any screening at all, and when you ask people in the camps themselves, no one seems to know much about any such process. In any case, if the government has been conducting a screening process for four months now, why hasn't it been releasing those people who have passed the test?

We see the government is now promising "day passes" in one limited area (Mannar but not Vavuniya nor Trincomalee, where the bulk of the IDPs are) so IDPs can leave the camp, but we have yet to see this working in practice. It seems a strange idea in any case: if these people are allowed to go out for the day, then they surely have passed the screening process, so why aren't they allowed out all the time?

The fact is, all talk of release dates and resettlement schedules is nonsense. As the UN Secretary-General's Representative on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, Walter Kaelin, made clear on Tuesday, saying:

"It is imperative to immediately take all measures necessary to decongest the overcrowded camps in Northern Sri Lanka with their difficult and risky living conditions. The IDPs should be allowed to leave these camps voluntarily and in freedom, safety and dignity to their homes. If this is not possible in the near future, the displaced must be allowed to stay with host families or in open transit sites. This is particularly important as the monsoon season is approaching."

Also on Tuesday, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon himself warned of the dangers of Sri Lanka's current policy, noting that the government risked creating "bitterness" if it failed to rapidly resettle Tamil refugees. Indeed, the harsh conditions in the camps are already sparking unrest, as we saw in Vavuniya at the weekend. But also in the longer term, the government's policy of imprisoning so many Tamil citizens without cause is only sowing the seeds of discontent that will grow into Sri Lanka's next violent conflict.

These are precisely the warnings the International Crisis Group has been giving and exactly the solutions we've been calling for months, and we are glad to see them accepted and supported at the very highest international levels. There is now no credible international voice saying anything else, and the Sri Lankan government has run out of excuses for continuing to keep these hundreds of thousands of innocent people prisoner.

The European Union and its member states have limited direct influence over the government of Sri Lanka, but working with our international partners, there are steps to take. The EU and its member states should:

1) speak publicly, clearly and often about the need for the displaced to have freedom of movement immediately.

2) officially demand access to the camps for all humanitarian agencies and the media.

3) work to ensure that any disarmament, demobilisation and rehabilitation/reintegration (DDR) programs are ONLY conducted with ICRC involvement and a clear legal framework. (Currently, the UK Department for International Development, DFID, and the International Organization for Migration, IOM, are funding DDR projects in which the ICRC plays no part, and no legal regime governs the process.)

4) press the UN to put a binding time limit on its phased assistance to the camps. These should not become long-term facilities.

5) oppose further disbursement of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan due later this month until the government of Sri Lanka meets the commitments on resettlement it made in its July Letter of Intent a letter to the IMF (sent by the Sri Lankan Ministry of Finance and Planning to the IMF on 16 July 2009), which included a pledge to resettle 70-80% of IDPs by the end of this year (Point 10).

In general, no donors should fund any substantial development work until there is a clear plan, with cross-ethnic consultation and some restoration of democratic rights. We must ensure international monies are not used to fund unfair and destabilising political arrangements that set the stage for the island's next violent ethnic conflict.

The International Monetary Fund has issued a statement warning Sri Lanka from building up its foreign currency reserves by borrowing from overseas investors.

Sri Lanka’s foreign currency reserves reached a high of $4 billion, as estimated by Central Bank, enough to cover four months of imports and the highest in the island’s history.

This is in stark contrast to earlier in the year, at the height of the civil war, when foreign currency reserves fell to $1.7 billion, enough to cover just one month’s worth of imports. Foreign investors also withdrew over $600 million in government bills and bonds, as the climax of the war coincided with the global economic crisis.

The reserves were built up by the sale of government debt to foreigners. "Total net foreign inflows to the government Treasury bills and bonds since mid May 2009 to 11 September 2009 amounted to US$ 1.2 billion,” said Central Bank governor Nivard Cabraal.

However, this has aggravated the International Monetary Fund, which is providing a $2.6 billion loan to Sri Lanka.

"We don't want Sri Lanka to borrow its way to build reserves," said head of the IMF mission to Sri Lanka, Brian Aitken. "The central bank has been building a war chest of reserves lately through debt. We would prefer if Sri Lanka built up reserves from exports and from remittances and not by borrowings."

Mr Aitken was in Colombo on a two week review of the island’s economy, as the loan is to be paid in instalments, subject to quarterly reviews. After the first instalment of $322.2 million was paid in July, the second is awaiting approval from the IMF executive board. IMF offices have also re-opened in Colombo, in order to keep a close eye on its lending programme. The organisation left the country in 2007, when it decided that it would no longer lend to the island.

Meanwhile, Iran has agreed to extend an interest free credit facility to Sri Lanka for one more year, to purchase Iranian crude oil.

In November 2007, after President Rajapakse’s visit to Iran, this facility was first introduced, which allowed Sri Lanka to import more than $1.05 billion worth of crude oil in 2008.

"There was no denying that the country was hard pressed for foreign currency to fund the purchase of essential military hardware," an official said. He said, "Last year, crude oil imports exceeded US$1 billion in total value with Sri Lanka not having to pay hard cash to open Letters of Credit, while Iran provided 4 months interest free credit and a further three months at a concessionary rate of interest."

Iran also agreed to supply $1.03 billion in order to fund the refurbishment and expansion of the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation owned oil refinery at Sapugaskanda. This is repayable over 15 years, with a 5 year grace period. Current plans, forecast that at the end of the project, oil output capacity will be doubled from 50,000 to 100,000 barrels of oil a day.

Twenty-four fishermen from Keechchaangkuppam in Naakarkoayil area in Tamil Nadu, fishing in Kanniyaakumari seas in five boats Friday night, were brutally assaulted and cast naked in the seas by Sri Lanka Navy (SLN) soldiers, sources in Naakarkoayil said.

SLN soldiers had beaten the fishermen on their heads with the ice blocks taken by the fishermen to preserve their catch, the sources added. Fishermen in the coastal areas of Tamil Nadu saved the 24 fishermen who managed to swim ashore on Saturday, September 26 morning and admitted them in the local hospital, the sources further said.

The SLN soldiers had threatened to open fire on the fishermen, driving them into the sea, the sources said.

Their clothes, fishing nets, outboard motors, ice knives and the fish they had caught had all been confiscated by the SLN soldiers, the fishermen said.

Tension prevails among the fishermen in the coast of Tamil Nadu.

Tamil Nadu fishermen had just called off their continued boycott of fishing demanding Tamil Nadu government to take action against SLN for shooting fishermen from Tamil Nadu side of the seas.

Their fellow fishermen being assaulted and driven naked has aroused the fury of Tamil Nadu fishermen.

Colombo government is encouraged by the appeasement policy of Karunanidhi government of Tamil Nadu 'not to anger the Sinhalese', commented fishermen circles in Tamil Nadu.

Meanwhile, a Sri Lankan court remanded 17 fishermen from Rameswaram to judicial custody at the Anuradhapura prison on Friday, pending trial on October 1.

The SLN detained 21 Rameswaram fishermen for crossing the international maritime boundary line, along with their five mechanised boats on Wednesday, September 16.

U Arulanantham, Tamil Nadu state coordinator of Alliance for the Release of Innocent Fishermen said that action was being taken for the early release of the fishermen.

Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ratnasiri Wickramanayaka gave a long triumphant speech at the 64^th UN General Assembly in New York, to a hall that was more than half empty, reported Inner City Press.

According to the non-profit public interest organisation, the Prime Minister “droned on” as the Sri Lankan Foreign Affairs and Defense Ministers “sat with their head in their hands”.

In his speech, Wickramanayaka repeated promises that the government were doing all they could to help resettle the civilians in camps. He however warned that "the stability and security that we have restored at great human cost cannot and must not be compromised, particularly when a large number of self-confessed ex-LTTE cadres continue to mix with the IDPs (internally displaced persons)," hinting that the resettlement may be delayed even longer.

The Prime minister also made it clear that Colombo would not allow the UN to “interfere in internal affairs”. Relations between the UN and the Sri Lankan government have been strained, since the climax of the war in May, amid allegations of human rights abuses.

As the Prime Minister spoke, Tamil Americans rallied in front of the UN to protest over the organisation’s inaction.

Before the Prime Minister addressed the UN General Assembly, he spoke at the Asia Society at Park Avenue, Manhattan, where he started his speech by saying "our country is nourished by Buddhism". It has been reported that the only questions   Wickramanayaka answered were “pre screened softball questions”, according to Inner City Press.

The organisation also claimed that “several facts were plainly misrepresented.”

“The Asia Society's questioner -- who multiple times and accurately said, "I am by no means an expert on Sri Lanka" -- asked if the International Committee of the Red Cross has access to all the IDPs. Yes, Wickramanayake replied. But the ICRC has complained of no access to at least 10,000 people.”

“Then Wickramanayake said that two ICRC staffers were found to have "direct" ties to the LTTE and were arrested. Presumably he was referring to the two UN system staff, a question that Inner City Press wrote on a note card that was never read out by the moderator. Nor was a question about the GSP Plus tax benefit in Europe, which Sri Lanka stands to lose for human rights violations.”

The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon met with the Prime Minister after his speech, to discuss the situation in these camps, and in particular to urge rapid resettlement as the monsoon season approaches.

“Failure to rapidly resettle nearly 300,000 Sri Lankans displaced by the government's final onslaught against Tamil separatists and further suffering under harsh conditions in the camps could result in growing bitterness,” said the UN Secretary General.

Is the Rajapaksa regime caught in the grips of the ME Syndrome? - Missing the Enemy, that is. Over the last two weeks, the leading lights of the regime have warned of conspiracies to destabilize the regime and even to replace it and have used the state controlled media as well as the defence ministry website to launch propaganda attacks against alleged conspirators, this columnist included.

It is the dirty nasty imperialist West and their local hirelings who are at the bottom of this. They tried to save the LTTE and failed. Now, they are determined to ensure regime destabilization and change. The extension of the GSP Plus concession, the report on war crimes to the US Senate, the Pascoe visit and continuing international concern about the plight of the IDPs are all elements of this dastardly plan. It is only the love of country of the mass of patriots, in the south in particular, their political savvy and courage that can stop this insidious plan in its tracks, whether it be through a resounding mandate for the regime in the provincial elections or through entirely suitable and grisly punishment of those identified as traitors.

The regime clearly misses an enemy. It seems to be dangerously unsure of itself in the absence of one. The emperor of yore was unaware of his nakedness. What would have happened if he were aware?

What is especially worrying is that these accounts of conspiracies to stabilize the regime and change it emanating from the heart of the regime are destabilizing in themselves. They suggest that the war in effect is not over and that Sri Lanka has no choice but to embark on a collision course with an influential section of the international community, which has traditionally been an ally of this country. What is the hard evidence for this?

It would seem to be the case that the report of the EU investigators in the context of the extension of the GSP Plus concession, has served as a catalyst for conspiracy theories. The GSP Plus trade concession was based on the ratification and effective implementation of some twenty-seven international human rights instruments and labour standards. In the Sri Lankan case, as per the terms of the concession, the EU decided to instigate into the ratification and effective implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The findings of the investigation will feed into the decision on whether to extend the concession to Sri Lanka. The concession was granted in the aftermath of the tsunami.

Media reportage of the report of the investigation and a public statement to this effect by a ministry secretary, indicate that it is negative and that the crux of the issue is human rights. Human rights, underpins the US Senate request for a report on war crimes from the State Department. Accountability in respect of human rights violations was flagged by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on a number of occasions and as far back as March of this year. It was also mentioned in the communiqué issued after the visit of the UN Secretary General at the end of May in which the point was made that this was best dealt with nationally. The issue also featured in the visit to Sri Lanka by the UN Under Secretary General for Political Affairs Lyn Pascoe. It further features in the controversy over the Channel 4 video and the comments on the investigation into it conducted by the regime, which concluded that the video was a fake. Philip Alston, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative on Extra Judicial Killings has called for an independent investigation into the authenticity of the video.

This week, Walter Kaelin, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative on the Human Rights of IDPs will visit Sri Lanka and yet again human rights issues will be highlighted. Indeed, the fate of the IDPs encompasses many of the dimensions of the human rights issue and constitutes the litmus test for peace, reconciliation and national unity. The central concern here is that of the freedom of movement of IDPs – Sri Lankan citizens who are being detained in camps without any legal basis and in violation of international human rights and humanitarian norms.

The onset of monsoonal rains has alerted the regime to an impending humanitarian catastrophe, a foretaste of which was produced by rains in August. Consequently, there were announcements of action on the assurance given that 80 per cent of the IDPs would be returned in 180 days. IDPs, it was announced could go and live with relatives once the latter were screened and it clearly established that they were not LTTE supporters or sympathizers. However, there are reports that the IDPs are being relocated from one camp to another – from the Menik Farm camp complex to “transit” camps elsewhere in the north and east. Clearly the “decongestion” of the Menik Farm complex, which houses double the number of human beings it was built to accommodate, is being prioritized on account of the onset of the monsoon at the expense of the freedom of movement of our fellow citizens. A case in the Supreme Court taken by the Centre for Policy Alternatives and this columnist in the public interest on the rights of the IDPs is still to be concluded, on way or another.

Other aspects of the situation of the IDPs relate to the legal status and fate of those who have been identified as LTTE cadres, supporters and sympathizers, access and basic facilities. Other human rights issues that are the focus of international concern are the Tissainayagam verdict, the expulsion of the UNICEF spokesperson James Elder and the fate of UN workers held by the regime.

Human rights issues are stubborn ones. They will not go away. They cannot be dealt with by denial, bravado, defiance, conspiracy theories or neglect. Moreover they are indubitably in the national interest and to the detriment of no one other than the perpetrators of violations. At the same time, foreign policy cannot be conducted through allegation and counter allegation, shrill incoherence and what increasingly looks like incomprehension and incompetence. Most importantly governance cannot be served or sustained by conflict and conspiracy, fear, paranoia and insecurity. We are part of an international community. Human rights and the international community have to be dealt with maturely, responsibly, constructively. Surely this is not beyond a regime, which enjoys such unprecedented popularity?

This is surely not the time for enmity, but for peace, reconciliation and unity to realize the full potential of this country and capitalize on the military defeat of the LTTE.

Accusing the Indian and Tamil Nadu governments not acting to curb the "violation" of civil liberties in Sri Lanka, AIADMK leader Jayalalithaa Jayaram has threatened to launch a mass agitation.

In a statement released in Chennai on Tuesday September 22, Jayalalithaa urged the Congress led Indian government to "ensure life and dignity" of Tamils imprisoned in various camps in the island.

According to Express Buzz, Jayalalithaa said that the AIADMK and people of Tamil Nadu expect the Centre to raise its voice against the human rights violations in the refugee camps in Sri Lanka.

If the Centre does not act immediately, “the AIADMK, along with like-minded political parties, will be forced to launch a mass agitation to focus world vision on the brutal civil liberties violations in Sri Lanka.”

The former chief minister said “The gruesome footage, reportedly filmed by a soldier on a mobile phone camera, reinforces my earlier claim that civil liberties are non-existent in Sri Lanka and that the Tamil population there is subject to barbaric atrocities at the hands of the Sri Lankan Army.”

“Sri Lanka claims to be a democratic country, where the rule of law prevails. No democracy sanctions this sort of summary mass execution, where human dignity is wantonly trampled upon,” she added.

Jayalalithaa said the AIADMK has never been a votary of terrorism or terrorist outfits. “I have personally been a very vocal critic of the LTTE, ever since that outfit degenerated from being valiant fighters for the liberation of Tamils into a terrorist organisation that annihilated political opponents, murdered anyone who did not toe their line and heaped suffering on the Tamil people whose cause they were claiming to espouse.” Reported the Express Buzz.

“Even assuming that the persons being shot dead in the footage telecast were LTTE activists, executing them summarily without a trial is barbaric, inhuman and contrary to civilized norms. It also violates international law relating to treatment of prisoners of war.”

Slamming the DMK government in Tamil Nadu, she said “As such, the AIADMK does not expect the DMK government to even make a whimper of protest against the atrocities.

The Tamil Nadu government has decided to postpone the Ninth World Tamil Conference, it planned to hold in Coimbatore in January 2010, following a political controversy with opposition parties questioning the locus standi of the government to organise such an event as well as its timing.

A committee headed by Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi, which reviewed the progress of the meet, took the decision to enable participation of more Tamil scholars from across the world as they needed time to plan their travel, an official release said.

Parties, including the AIADMK and the BJP, have said that the ruling DMK should first ensure the return of Internally Displaced Persons lodged in various camps in Sri Lanka to their homes as they are presently “languishing behind barbed wires”.

Jayalalithaa Jayaram, the leader of AIADMK, attacked Karunanidhi for organising the World Tamil Conference, when Tamils in Sri Lanka and other parts were in a state of distress.

In a statement released in Chennai, Jayalalithaa said the conference 'is nothing but a farcical charade for self-aggrandisement' and 'like all utterances of Mr Karunanidhi, this one too smacks of vested interest and has nothing to do with his self-proclaimed love for Tamil language'.

She questioned the DMK government’s locus standi to host the conference and its timing, saying Tamils were in a “state of distress” all over the world, particularly in Sri Lanka and Malaysia.

Malaysian Tamils, who hosted the first International Tamil Conference in 1966, feel that they are relegated to the status of secondary citizens in that country.

The Tamils of Sri Lanka, who hosted the fourth International Conference in Jaffna in 1974, were living in refugee camps in their own country.

Their struggle for self-determination was ruthlessly snuffed out by the Sri Lankan Government with military aid and logistical support from an Indian Government, of which Karunanidhi’s DMK party is a key constituent. However, Mr Karunanidhi never raised his voice, let alone his little finger, when the massacre of the Sri Lankan Tamils was on, she alleged.

The autonomous International Association of Tamil Research (IATR) alone could conduct such World Tamil Conferences and Chief Minister Karunanidhi’s announcement on the next meet “makes no mention whatsoever of the IATR,”  Jayalalithaa said.

“The DMK government has no locus standi to organise IATR’s series of International Tamil Conferences. If the January 2010 conference is being organised by Karunanidhi, independent of IATR, then it cannot qualify to be the ninth International Tamil Conference as it is being made out,” she said.

What Ranil, Mangala and Mano Ganesan said on 3 September at a Platform for Freedom Press Conference on the IDP issue was fairly widely covered in the print and electronic media, but three other contributors, Siritunga Jayasuriya, Nimalka Fernando and Herman Kumara failed to attract coverage. They were more sharp and interesting, but not being parliamentarians, I guess, less news worthy. I will focus on them to redress this imbalance. But first a Mangala snippet which was both catchy and accurate; he defined the Vanni interns as FDPs (Forcibly Detained Persons) insisting that calling them internally displaced persons (IDPs) was simply not true.

First, let me have my say. It is my view that it is the FDP issue that will have more severe repercussions on the relationship between the Tamils and the government and on Sinhala-Tamil relations than the hotly canvassed political package uproar. Astute folks are pretty well reconciled that nothing will happen in the foreseeable future about devolution, thirteen plus, minus or zilch, and home-grown solutions. It’s going to be the same old unitary state and constitution, with or without some superficial tinkering, until and unless something dramatic happens, such as the change to a left government; and that’s not on the cards.

But between two and three hundred thousand people of one community, held in indefinite and illegal detention by the hegemonic state of another community, well that’s tertiary stage cancer and its repercussions are going to be far, far more serious than people seem to realise. I give it three more months and if the FDPs are not all released from forcible detention, then the gulf will again widen to distrust similar to the post 1972-Constitution, post Vattukkotai Resolution, or intensifying LTTE periods. The gulf will become unbridgeable again. In a word, it’s the FDPs stupid, not the package that will hinge, or if you prefer unhinge, Tamil consciousness.

Siritunga’s take on it: For those who need some background, Siritunga is the leader of the United Socialist Party (USP), a non government left party and as presidential candidate in 2005 he polled 36,000 votes, certainly much more than I expected. I have been closely associated with him politically from 1970 when he was a key leader in the Vama or left tendency in the LSSP which matured into the NSSP in 1977. He parted company with us on the Indo-Lanka Accord and 13th Amendment which he opposed while we (the majority in the NSSP) gave these measures our conditional support. Nevertheless, he and I have remained personal friends. The USP has fraternal ties with international Marxist currents in many countries but I am not aware what its active membership within the country is.

As a Sinhalese Marxist he expressed shock at the inadequate response in the South to the fact that such a large number of Tamils could be held in illegal detention for over 100 days. “Imagine the uproar in the country if two to three lakhs of ordinary Sinhalese people had been held behind barbed wire like this”. How much longer is this going to continue he inquired? And this inquiry continued to the heart of the matter. “These people have lived under LTTE Administration for nearly two decades. Of course a large number of them or a family member would have worked in that Administration, many would have associated with the LTTE, and to be perfectly frank, most would have supported or been sympathetic to the LTTE point of view”. This goes to the heart of the government’s conundrum; if the government intends to hold everybody who is or was sympathetic to the LTTE indefinitely, then it will have to hold some hundreds of thousands of people forever. The real problem is not a few thousand ex-cadres, the problem is hundreds of thousands who, come on be sensible about it, must have been pro-LTTE.

I think it is inevitable that he comes to the same conclusion as I have done in my third paragraph, but from an inside the camps perspective. I asserted that the FDP issue is destined to be the crucible in which the fires of broad ethno-political conflict will light up again. Siritunga says “If you hold people like this you are operating a farm for breeding the next generation of LTTEers, by whatever name they sprout. Is the government trying to breed another one lakh of terrorists?”

Insensitivity and secrecy: Nimalka introduced a women’s and welfare perspective as one would expect from a person of her background. Initially though she made a comment that was news to me. Most of the food, dry rations and other essential needs of the FDPs are provided by UN agencies and NGOs she said.

It is not GoSL but these organisations that foot the bill; the work in the camp is done by NGO volunteers and GoSL’s expenses, other than paying for the military, are small. Nimalka’s main grouse however was framed in these questions. “Do mothers have the right to take a fevered child to hospital? Can a woman who is bleeding seek emergency medical help?” The questions are rhetorical, the answers obvious.

Why must the military be in control of the camps, why not civilian agencies? Herman Kumara of the Fishermen’s Welfare Association was quite pointed in his repetition of the question on many people’s mind. Why can’t visitors enter the camps? Why are journalists barred? Why are international agencies kept out? Why is it taking the courts so long to make a straightforward order to allow members of parliament to visit the camps? As Mangala added “I can walk into any prison at will and meet any criminal, but I am not allowed to meet these people held in detention for no reason.” The reasons offered for this paranoid secrecy varied from the need to hide human rights violations to calculations relating to the upcoming elections. I think it will be some time before the real reason comes seeping out. 

Yet even in victory the Sri Lankan government seems unable to define peace or outline a political solution to the long-standing cultural and political grievances of the Tamil minority, which makes up 12 percent of the 21.3-million population. A process of national reconciliation anchored in federalism and multiculturalism can succeed only if human-rights abuses by all parties are independently investigated. United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon has acknowledged that civilian casualties were "unacceptably high," especially as the war built to a bloody crescendo.

The continuing air of martial triumph in Sri Lanka, though, is making it difficult to heal the wounds of war through three essential "Rs": relief, recovery and reconciliation. In fact, the military victory bears a distinct family imprint: President Mahinda Rajapaksa was guided by two of his brothers, Gotabaya, the defense secretary who authored the war plan, and Basil, the presidential special adviser who formulated the political strategy. Yet another brother, Chamal, is the ports minister who awarded China a contract to build the billion-dollar Hambantotta port, on Sri Lanka's southeast.

In return, Beijing provided Colombo not only the weapon systems that decisively tilted the military balance in its favor, but also the diplomatic cover to prosecute the war in defiance of international calls to cease offensive operations to help stanch rising civilian casualties. Through such support, China has succeeded in extending its strategic reach to a critically located country in India's backyard that sits astride vital sea-lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean region.

Sinhalese nationalists now portray Rajapaksa as a modern-day Dutugemunu, a Sinhalese ruler who, according to legend, vanquished an invading Tamil army led by Kind Elara more than 2,000 years ago. But four months after the Tamil Tigers were crushed, it is clear the demands of peace extend far beyond the battlefield. What is needed is a fundamental shift in thegovernment's policies to help create greater interethnic equality, regional autonomy and a reversal of the state-driven militarization of society.

But Rajapaksa, despite promising to address the root causes of conflict, has declared: "Federalism is out of the question." How elusive the peace dividend remains can be seen from Colombo's decision to press ahead with a further expansion of the military. Not content with increasing the military's size five-fold since the late 1980s to more than 200,000 troops today, Colombo is raising the strength further to 300,000, in the name of "eternal vigilance." Soon after the May victory, the government, for example, announced a drive to recruit 50,000 new troops to help manage the northern areas captured from the rebels.

The Sri Lankan military already has more troops than that of Britain or Israel. The planned further expansion would make the military in tiny Sri Lanka larger than the militaries of major powers like France, Japan and Germany. By citing a continuing danger of guerrilla remnants reviving the insurgency, Rajapaksa, in fact, seems determined to keep a hyper-militarized Sri Lanka on something of a war footing. Yet another issue of concern is the manner the nearly 300,000 Tamil civilians still held by the government in camps where, in the recent words of U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, the "internally displaced persons are effectively detained under conditions of internment."

Such detention risks causing more resentment among the Tamils and sowing the seeds of future unrest. The internment was intended to help weed out rebels, many of whom already have been identified and transferred to military sites. Those in the evacuee camps are the victims and survivors of the deadly war. To confine them in the camps against their will is to further victimize and traumatize them.

Sri Lanka's interests would be better served through greater transparency. It should grant the U.N., International Red Cross and nongovernmental organizations at home and abroad full and unhindered access to care for and protect the civilians in these camps, allowing those who wish to leave the camps to do so and live with relatives and friends. Otherwise, it seriously risks breeding further resentment.

Then there is the issue of thousands of missing people, mostly Tamils. Given that many families are still searching for missing members, the government ought to publish a list of all those it is holding — in evacuee camps, prisons, military sites and other security centers. Even suspected rebels in state custody ought to be identified and not denied access to legal representation.

Authorities should disclose the names of those they know to be dead — civilians and insurgents — and the possible circumstances of their death. Also, the way to fill the power vacuum in the Tamil-dominated north is not by dispatching additional army troops in tens of thousands, but by setting up a credible local administration to keep the peace and initiate rehabilitation and reconstruction after more than 25 years of war.

Any government move to return to the old policy of settling Sinhalese in Tamil areas is certain to stir up fresh problems. More fundamentally, such have been the costs of victory that Sri Lankan civil society stands badly weakened and civil liberties curtailed. The wartime suppression of a free press and curtailment of fundamental rights continues in peacetime, undermining democratic freedoms and creating a fear psychosis.

Public meetings cannot be held without government permission. Sweeping emergency regulations also remain in place, arming the security forces with expansive powers of search, arrest, detention and seizure of property. Individuals can still be held in unacknowledged detention for up to 12 months. For the process of reconciliation to begin in earnest, it is essential the government shed its war-gained powers and accept, as Pillay says, "an independent and credible international investigation . . . to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human-rights and international humanitarian law" by all parties during the conflict.

Pillay has gone on to say: "A new future for the country, the prospect of meaningful reconciliation and lasting peace, where respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms can become a reality for all, hinges upon such an in-depth and comprehensive approach."

Unfortunately, Colombo still seeks to hold back the truth. Those who speak up are labeled "traitors" (if they are Sinhalese) or accused of being on the payroll of the Tamil diaspora. Last year, a Sri Lankan minister accused the U.N. undersecretary general for humanitarian affairs, John Holmes, of being on the rebels' payroll after Holmes called Sri Lanka one of the world's most dangerous places for aid workers.

The media remains muzzled, and a host of journalists have been murdered or imprisoned. Lawyers who dare to take up sensitive cases face threats. Recently, a well-known astrologer who predicted the president's ouster from power was arrested. And this month, the U.N. Children's Fund communications chief was ordered to leave Sri Lanka after he discussed the plight of children caught up in the government's military campaign.

Rather than begin a political dialogue on regional autonomy and a more level-playing field for the Tamils in education and government jobs, the government has seen its space get constricted by the post-victory upsurge of Sinhalese chauvinism opposed to the devolution of powers to the minorities.

The hardline constituency argues that the Tamils shouldn't get in defeat what they couldn't secure through three decades of unrest and violence. Indeed, such chauvinism seeks to tar federalism as a potential forerunner to secession, although the Tamil insurgency sprang from the state's rejection of decentralization and power-sharing. The looming parliamentary and presidential elections also make devolution difficult, even though the opposition is splintered and Rajapaksa seems set to win a second term.

Reversing the militarization of society, ending the control of information as an instrument of state policy and promoting political and ethnic reconciliation are crucial to postconflict peace-building and to furthering the interests of all Sri Lankans — Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. So also is the need to discard the almost mono-ethnic character of the security forces. Colombo has to stop dragging its feet on implementing the constitution's 13th amendment, which requires the ceding of some powers to the provincial or local level.

Sadly, there is little international pressure on Colombo, despite the leverage offered by the Sri Lankan economy's need for external credit. The U.S. can veto any decision of the International Monetary Fund, but it chose to abstain from the recent IMF vote to give Colombo a $2.8 billion loan. In the face of China's stonewalling at the U.N., Ban has been unable to appoint a special envoy on Sri Lanka. A U.N. special envoy can shine an international spotlight to help build pressure on a recalcitrant government. But on Sri Lanka, the best the U.N. has been able to do is to send a political official to Colombo this month for talks.

It is thus important for the democratic players, including the United States, the European Union, Japan and Norway — co-chairs of the so-called Friends of Sri Lanka — and India, to coordinate their policies on Sri Lanka. If Rajapaksa continues to shun true reconciliation, these countries should ratchet up pressure on Colombo by lending support to calls for an international investigation into the thousands of civilian deaths in the final weeks of the war.

The International Criminal Court has opened an initial inquiry into Sri Lankan rights-abuse cases that could turn into a full-blown investigation. Sri Lanka, however, is not an ICC signatory and thus would have to consent — or be referred by the U.N. Security Council — for the ICC to have jurisdiction over it. As world history attests, peace sought through the suppression and humiliation of an ethnic community proves to be elusive.

If Rajapaksa wants to earn a place in history as another Dutugemunu, he has to emulate that ancient king's post-victory action and make honorable peace with the Tamils before there is a recrudescence of violence. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.

Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the independent, privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is on the international advisory council of the Campaign for Peace and Justice in Sri Lanka.

“This duty-free facility is extremely vital to Sri Lanka as the country benefits significantly from these concessions to remain competitive in markets in the EU” said Mahesh Amalean of MAS holdings, South Asia’s largest manufacturer of intimate apparel. 

If the program is not renewed, Sri Lanka’s garment industry, which sells around $3.47 billion to the EU alone, would be severely hit. Sri Lanka could no longer compete with countries such as Cambodia and Bangladesh, which also suffers concessions under a separate program, said Mr Amalean.

Companies who regularly export goods into the EU, such as Marks & Spencer’s, Next & Tesco could relocate their factories into these countries, if the GSP+ facility is withdrawn.

`The cost of manufacturing in these countries is also far less than in Sri Lanka`, he noted. `If the GSP Plus is withdrawn, they will have a competitive edge in the EU marketplace`.

`All these factors put together will pose a very big challenge to Sri Lanka`, the MAS Holdings boss underlined. `We need to take cognizance of this`.

 This was echoed by the head of the Sri Lanka Apparel Exporters Association, Kumar Mirchandani.

“Price pressure is so high... people move away over a difference of 10 cents,” he said. “We can’t take 10 per cent off our prices — we don’t have those margins.”

 The Sri Lankan Government has promised to pump $150 million into the apparel industry, in order to try and increase exports to countries such as India and China. The European Union however, made up 52% of all Sri Lanka’s garment exports, and 36% of all goods exports, making it an extremely hard market to replace. 

“GSP Plus is crucial... withdrawing it would mean a lot of hardship,” said Mr Mirchandani. 

The situation has become so critical, that even UNP Deputy Leader Karu Jayasuriya pleaded with the both the Sri Lankan Government and EU to allow the concessions to continue. 

“As a responsible opposition, the UNP does not wish to see all our people suffer the consequences of the sins of a few. It is in this spirit that we have appealed to the EU recently to reconsider before withdrawing the trade concessions to Sri Lanka since more than a million of our poorest people will be affected by such an action while the perpetrators of violence who are responsible for our predicament will be largely untouched,” he said. 

He slammed the current government and said they “must realize how serious the consequences of its actions are going to be for the people of this country. Today more than a million, direct and indirect jobs are in jeopardy.” 

“The people of Sri Lanka need to understand that this government has long since perfected the art of propaganda and spin doctoring... What the democratic world is asking of us is the restoration of democratic rights in Sri Lanka.”

Meanwhile, the team of four ministers appointed by President Rajapakse concluded that they had met all conditions laid down by the EU for the concessions to continue. 

“I see no reason for the EU to prevent the GSP+ facility being extended to Sri Lanka for a further period,” commented Deputy Finance Minister Sarath Amunugama, who is part of the team. 

Sri Lanka’s admission into the GSP Plus program has been under review since October 2008, after increasing pressure on the EU to investigate human rights abuses. Since then, investigators have been refused entry into the country and categorically rejected by the Sri Lankan Government. 

The EU is set to vote on the termination of the GSP+ tariff on October 15^th.

It has been three months since Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse declared the country "liberated" from Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) after a 26-year war.

He said he wanted to settle most of the displaced Tamil civilians within 180 days.

But today, with more than half that time elapsed, nearly 300,000 are still being held in "internment camps", to which the media and humanitarian organisations have virtually no access.

One person who was able to visit some of them in May was United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon.

He said: "I have travelled around the world and visited similar places, but these are by far the most appalling scenes I have seen."

In the middle of this month, the camps were flooded by downpours that, according to The New York Times, "sent rivers of muck cascading between tightly packed rows of flimsy shelters, overflowed latrines and sent hundreds of families scurrying for higher ground".

Moreover, there is no public list of those being held in the camps, and many families do not know whether their loved ones are alive or dead.

The brutal and violent methods used by the LTTE during the conflict are beyond dispute. But the government claimed to draw a distinction between LTTE fighters and the law-abiding Tamil population, whose genuine political grievances it would address once the "terrorists" had been defeated. So far, nothing like that has happened.

Although it has screened out those it believes were LTTE cadres and sent them to separate camps, the government has repeatedly extended its own deadline for releasing the civilians who are still in the main camps.

People who question this inside Sri Lanka are accused of being traitors in the pay of "the LTTE diaspora", while outsiders are accused of using humanitarian concerns as an excuse for neo-imperialist intervention.

Sri Lankan journalists who criticise the government have been arrested, beaten and in some cases murdered in broad daylight, while many more have fled the country. Foreign journalists have been kicked out, and Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are not allowed into the country.

In the last weeks of the fighting, an estimated 20,000 civilians lost their lives. Government forces were accused of shelling Tamil civilians and killing people who tried to surrender.

The LTTE was charged with using civilians as human shields, forcibly recruiting them as fighters and shooting those who tried to flee. There were rumours of mass graves but no independent observer has been able to investigate.

The government claims to have won the "war on terror" within its own frontiers, and denies the right of countries that have been less successful to question its methods.

As one of the five "Colombo Powers" that organised the historic Bandung Conference in 1955, and a leading member of the Non-Aligned Movement, Sri Lanka was, for many decades, a responsible democracy, even a model member of the international community. Surely, the people of Sri Lanka do not want to compromise that enviable status.

Friends of Sri Lanka, especially in the developing world, do not understand why President Rajapakse chose Myanmar as the first country to visit after winning the war.

They were concerned to read, on the government's own website, that one reason for this choice was that "the (Myanmar) generals are increasingly finding it difficult to contain insurgent groups in the country's northern frontier and are willing to learn some fresh lessons from President Mahinda Rajapakse on how to defeat the enemy".

That is not what the international community wishes to learn from Sri Lanka. Rather, it is expecting the country to be faithful to its democratic tradition and act on Mr Rajapakse's promises that the rights of minorities would be respected, that the displaced would be helped to return home, and that prisoners would be treated humanely.

We do not believe that most people in Sri Lanka agree with the view that developing- country governments can best deal with internal opposition by crushing it ruthlessly and treating any advice to respect human rights and humanitarian law as hypocritical. Sadly, the government's willingness to ignore these principles has met with very little international resistance.

Even the United States, which has urged the rapid release of all civilians and deplored the Sri Lankan government's slow timetable on political reform, is simultaneously encouraging US investors to "make Sri Lanka your next business stop".

This puts a heavy responsibility on Asia's key powers - India, Japan and China - which have been staunch supporters of the Rajapakse government and have channelled large sums of money to it (mainly, recently, for humanitarian purposes).

It is time for these governments to say clearly that further economic and political support will depend on the following conditions being fulfilled:

1. The UN, International Red Cross and voluntary agencies must be given full and unhindered access to care for and protect the civilians in the camps, and then help them return to wherever in their own country they choose to live.

2. A list of all those still alive and in custody should be published.

3. Those who continue to be detained as alleged LTTE combatants must be treated in accordance with the provisions of international law, and given urgent access to legal representation.

4. Accountability processes must be established to ensure that international aid is not diverted to purposes other than those for which it was given.

5. The Sri Lankan government should invite regional and international specialists in conflict reconciliation to help rebuild lives and communities.

6. Sri Lanka should request or accept a full UN investigation into war crimes committed by all parties during the war.

The government has won the war, and the world shares the feeling of relief visible among Sri Lanka's people. It remains for it to win the peace, and the rest of the world must help by insisting on the above conditions. Peace won by the brutal humiliation of a people is rarely secure.

Lakhdar Brahimi is a former Algerian foreign minister and United Nations Special Envoy. Edward Mortimer is Senior Vice-President of theSalzburg Global Seminar and was the chief speech-writer for former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan. Both are members of the Advisory Council of the Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace & Justice.

If war-scarred Sri Lanka is to re-emerge as a tropical paradise, it has to build enduring peace through genuine inter-ethnic equality and by making the transition from being a unitary State to being a federation that grants local autonomy. Yet even in victory, the Sri Lankan government seems unable to define peace or outline a political solution to the long-standing grievances of the Tamil minority.

A process of national reconciliation anchored in federalism and multiculturalism indeed can succeed only if possible war crimes and other human-rights abuses by all parties are independently and credibly investigated.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has acknowledged civilian casualties were 'unacceptably high,' especially as the war built to a bloody crescendo earlier this year. The continuing air of martial triumph in Sri Lanka, though, is making it difficult to heal the wounds of war through three essential 'Rs': Relief, recovery and reconciliation.

In fact, the military victory bears a distinct family imprint: President Mahinda Rajapaksa was guided by two of his brothers, Gotabaya, the powerful defence secretary who fashioned the war plan, and Basil, the presidential special adviser who formulated the political strategy. Yet another brother, Chamal, is the ports and civil aviation minister who awarded China a contract to build the billion dollar Hambantotta port, on Sri Lanka's southeast.

In return, Beijing provided Colombo not only the weapon systems that decisively titled the military balance in its favour, but also the diplomatic cover to prosecute the war in defiance of international calls to cease offensive operations to help stanch rising civilian casualties.

Through such support, China has succeeded in extending its strategic reach to a critically located country in India's backyard that sits astride vital sea-lanes of communication in the Indian Ocean region.

India also is culpable for the Sri Lankan bloodbath. Having been outwitted by China, India was compelled to lend critical assistance to Colombo, lest it lose further ground in Sri Lanka.

From opening an unlimited line of credit for Sri Lanka to extending naval and intelligence cooperation, India provided war-relevant support in the face of a deteriorating humanitarian situation in that island-nation.

Sinhalese nationalists now portray President Rajapaksa as a modern-day incarnation of Dutugemunu, a Sinhalese ruler who, according to legend, vanquished an invading Tamil army led by Kind Elara more than 2,000 years ago. But months after the Tamil Tigers were crushed, it is clear the demands of peace extend far beyond the battlefield.

What is needed is a fundamental shift in government's policies to help create greater inter-ethnic equality, regional autonomy and a reversal of the State-driven militarisation of society.

But Rajapaksa, despite promising to address the root causes of conflict, has declared: 'Federalism is out of the question.'

How elusive the peace dividend remains can be seen from Sri Lanka's decision to press ahead with a further expansion of its military.

Not content with increasing the military's size fivefold since the late 1980s to more than 200,000 troops today, Colombo is raising the strength further to 300,000, in the name of 'eternal vigilance.'

Soon after the May 2008 victory, the government, for example, announced a drive to recruit 50,000 new troops to help control the northern areas captured from the rebels.

The Sri Lankan military already is bigger than that of Britain and Israel. The planned further expansion would make the military in tiny Sri Lanka larger than the militaries of major powers like France, Japan and Germany.

By citing a continuing danger of guerrilla remnants reviving the insurgency, Rajapaksa is determined to keep a hyper-militarised Sri Lanka on something of a war footing.

Yet another issue of concern is the manner the government still holds nearly 300,000 civilians in camps where, in the recent words of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, the 'internally displaced persons are effectively detained under conditions of internment.'

Such detention risks causing more resentment among the Tamils and sowing the seeds of future unrest. The internment was intended to help weed out rebels, many of whom already have been identified and transferred to military sites.

Those in the evacuee camps are the victims and survivors of the deadly war. To confine them in the camps against their will is to further victimise and traumatise them.

Sri Lanka's interests would be better served through greater transparency. It should grant the UN, International Red Cross and nongovernmental organisations at home and abroad unfettered access to care for and protect the civilians in these camps, allowing those who wish to leave the camps to stay with relatives and friends.

Then there is the issue of thousands of missing people, mostly Tamils. Given that many families are still searching for missing members, the government ought to publish a list of all those it is holding - in evacuee camps, prisons, military sites and other security centres. Even suspected rebels in custody ought to be identified and not denied access to legal representation.

Bearing in mind that thousands of civilians were killed just in the final months of the war, the authorities should disclose the names of those they know to be dead - civilians and insurgents - and the possible circumstances of their death.

The way to fill the power vacuum in the Tamil-dominated north is not by dispatching additional army troops in tens of thousands, but by setting up a credible local administration to keep the peace and initiate rehabilitation and reconstruction after more than a quarter of a century of war. Yet there is a lurking danger that the government may seek to change demography by returning to its old policy of settling Sinhalese in Tamil areas.

More fundamentally, such have been the costs of victory that Sri Lankan civil society stands badly weakened. The wartime suppression of a free press and curtailment of fundamental rights continues in peacetime, undermining democratic freedoms and creating a fear psychosis.

Sweeping emergency regulations remain in place, arming the security forces with expansive powers of search, arrest and seizure of property. Public meetings cannot be held without government permission. Individuals can still be held in unacknowledged detention for up to 18 months.

For the process of reconciliation and healing to begin in earnest, it is essential the government give up wartime powers and accept, as the UN human rights commissioner has sought, 'an independent and credible international investigation...to ascertain the occurrence, nature and scale of violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law' by all parties during the conflict.

According to Ms Pillay, 'A new future for the country, the prospect of meaningful reconciliation and lasting peace, where respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms can become a reality for all, hinges upon such an in-depth and comprehensive approach.'

Rather than begin a political dialogue on regional autonomy and a more level playing field for the Tamils in education and government jobs, the government has seen its space get constricted by the post-victory upsurge of Sinhalese chauvinism opposed to the devolution of powers to the minorities.

The hard-line constituency argues that the Tamils in defeat shouldn't get what they couldn't secure through three decades of unrest and violence.

Indeed, such chauvinism seeks to tar federalism as a potential forerunner to secession, although the Tamil insurgency sprang from the State's rejection of decentralisation and power-sharing. The looming parliamentary and presidential elections also make devolution difficult, even though the Opposition is splintered and Rajapaksa seems set to win a second term.

Add to the picture the absence of international pressure, despite the leverage provided by a cash-strapped Sri Lankan economy. The United States enjoys a one-country veto in the International Monetary Fund, yet it chose to abstain from the recent IMF vote approving a desperately needed $2.8 billion loan to Sri Lanka.

In the face of China's stonewalling in the UN, Ban Ki-moon has been unable to appoint a UN special envoy on Sri Lanka, let alone order a probe into possible war crimes there. By contrast, the UN carried out a recently concluded investigation into Israel's three-week military offensive in Gaza earlier this year.

Today, reversing the militarisation of society, ending the control of information as an instrument of State policy and promoting political and ethnic reconciliation are crucial to post-conflict peace-building and to furthering the interests of all Sri Lankans -- Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. So also is the need to discard the almost mono-ethnic character of the security forces.

Colombo has to stop dragging its feet, as it has done for long, on implementing the Constitution's 13th amendment, which requires the ceding of some powers at the provincial level. But these tasks are unlikely to be addressed without sustained international diplomatic intervention.

As world history attests, peace sought to be achieved through the suppression and humiliation of an ethnic community has proven elusive. It will be a double tragedy for Sri Lanka if making peace proves more difficult than making war.

Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the independent, privately funded Centre for Policy Research in New Delhi, is on the international advisory council of the Campaign for Peace and Justice in Sri Lanka.