The Sri Lankan government has issued furious denials against allegations of war crimes committed by their forces during the final phase of the war last year.

 

After a week which saw various reports released by multiple sources with evidence of war crimes against security forces and individuals further up the command structure, senior representatives of the Sri Lankan government have denied any wrong doing.

                      

The testimony by two members of the Sri Lankan forces, broadcast by Britain’s Channel 4, in which they claimed that civilians and surrendering LTTE fighters and their families were tortured and killed, were dismissed as “fabricated” by Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella.

 

“They [Channel 4] have once again brought up this sordid story just when a Sri Lankan delegation is to attend crucial trade talks in Brussels with the European Union. I categorically deny these allegations of war atrocities said to have been committed by our armed forces,” he said.

 

Rambukwella stated that legal action would be filed against Channel 4.

 

Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the UN, Palitha Kohona had agreed to appear on the Channel 4 news program, but despite repeated, desperate attempts by the Channel 4 team to contact him, he failed to uphold his commitment to attend. However, the Sri Lankan High Commission in London

 

Meanwhile, the International Crisis Group (ICG) report which called on the international community to push for an independent international inquiry  was also dismissed.

 

Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Canada has dismissed claims her government committed war crimes.

 

“…there were no war crimes. We have been handling this conflict, so let us handle this,” Chithranganee Wagiswara said, speaking to The Globe and Mail.

 

She claimed that any concerns about the war will be addressed by the commission set up by the President Mahinda Rajapakse.

 

But the ICG report states that any investigations spearheaded by the Sri Lankan authorities are not going to be impartial, “given the entrenched culture of impunity” in Sri Lanka, which expelled foreign journalists and aid workers during the war’s final months.

 

That impunity, Ms. Arbour said in an interview, was bolstered by an international community eager to see the end of the ruthless Tiger movement and happy to look the other way “to give [the Sri Lankan government] a chance to finish it off for good” last May.

 

Meanwhile in Sri Lanka outrage is growing at what is perceived as western interference in domestic matters.

 

Accusations of human rights groups such as ICG, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International being on the payroll of the LTTE have been made in several Sinhala media outlets, including newspapers and on blog-sites.

 

“It would have been surprising indeed if there were no such moves to mark the end of terrorism in Sri Lanka, and the restoration of peace after 30 long years,” claimed the state run Daily News newspaper.

 

“It is a trend in some quarters of the West, that help keep the LTTE flag flying after the rout it suffered in May last year, and keep finding new evidence to suit their ends,” the paper reported.

The decision to hold this year’s International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) awards in Colombo was clearly a political, even geopolitical, calculation. Whereas the previous award ceremonies - held in UK (twice), South Africa (twice), Singapore, Malaysia, Dubai, Holland, Thailand and Macao, China, were meant to bring India ‘to the world’, this year’s event was intended instead to bring the world to Sri Lanka – or, more precisely, to the Sinhala south. It has done that, but in ways unintended.

 

The controversy that has rightly erupted was inevitable. Few decisions can be more dismissive of human suffering than to hold three days of glamorous celebration amid the horrors consequent to Sri Lanka’s frenzied slaughter last year of forty thousand Tamil civilians and its continued repression of the Tamils. The outraged Tamil Nadu film industry is staying away, and in the wake of public protests in India, there are doubts over the attendance of several Bollywood personalities. The clumsy rush to whitewash the regime in Colombo has thus, perversely, served to focus attention on, and further highlight, Sri Lanka’s grotesque past and present.

 

The hosting of IIFA event in Colombo is, however, symbolic of a much deeper dynamic; the nature of the linkages between the Tamils and the rest of the world. Whilst Sri Lanka and its allies try to project the illusion of ‘post conflict revival’ or an ‘Emerald Island’, hundreds of thousands of people, on account of their ethnicity alone, continue to suffer all manner of deprivation. In other words, while the Sinhala south is showcased and touts for economic inflows, the Northeast is isolated, hidden and scorched. This is not a mere legacy of protracted war, but of a long institutionalised, racial logic.

 

Before Sinhala domination began in the late 1940s, the Tamil homeland had been connected in myriad ways to global flows for millennia. Quite apart from the time of South India-based imperial networks, even during Western colonial rule the Northeast was well connected to the rest of the subcontinent and other parts of the world. Since the island’s independence from Britain, however, the Sinhala-dominated state has sought not only to concentrate power in the South, but also to isolate the Northeast, making Colombo the sole gateway between the world and the Tamil homeland.

 

Amid the international community’s efforts today to bypass Sinhala state’s obstructions and secure access  to the Northeast, what is often missed is how the Sinhala state’s denials of visas and travel permits to the Northeast, or ‘clearance’ to invest in, develop or otherwise link the Northeast to the world, is part of an inherent racialised logic. The point is illustrated, for example, by the state’s violent disruption in 1974 of the World Tamil Research Conference when it was hosted in Jaffna. The Sinhala regime had demanded the event be held in Colombo, not Jaffna, but when the organisers refused, Colombo belatedly despatched a police force to disrupt it. Eleven people died when the police stormed the venue.

 

For several decades - and from well before the war started - the Sinhala dominated state has systematically diverted international aid, investment and trade access to the South while excluding and marginalising the Northeast. What happened to international humanitarian assistance after the 2004 tsunami is a case in point. The only exceptions, meanwhile, have been Sinhala colonisation projects in the Northeast. (Ironically, it was Sri Lanka’s brutal pursuit of Sinhala domination that, apart from tearing up the social fabric of Tamil life in the island, triggered the refugee flows that generated today’s Diaspora and thus reconnected, in a fashion, the Northeast with the rest of the world.)

 

Unless the Sinhala stranglehold on the Northeast is first broken, the Tamils will continue to be largely – and deliberately - excluded from global economic flows. It is in this context that the growing call by the Tamils and others for an international boycott of Sri Lanka must be understood. Moreover, until there is a radical restructuring of political power on the island – and thus the ending of Sinhala sovereign control over all facets of Tamil life – the global flows which can help regenerate and rebuild the Tamil homeland and foster the thriving of the Tamil nation will be thwarted and blocked.

 

This, consequently, is the central logic of the Tamils’ continued insistence on the primacy of their right to self-determination. It cannot be forgotten that the demand for Tamil Eelam arose in the mid-seventies from the need to escape Sri Lanka’s stifling of Tamil social, economic and social life and to reintegrate with global community, free of the vagaries of Sinhala rule.

Tamils, members of one of the oldest nations of human civilization living in their historical homeland now divided between India and Sri Lanka, as well as living in many parts of the world as diaspora, observed with trauma the first anniversary of the genocide committed and continued to be committed on their nation in the island of Sri Lanka.

 

While the Sinhala state in the island openly and officially celebrated the occasion as its victory, Tamils experienced the phenomenon as a vicious unprecedented trial on human civilization by an international system that has been working against them.

 

Even after one year, the response of the international system is its refusal to recognize the gravity of the national question in the island and to recognize the structural genocide that is taking place.

 

The international system has still not accepted its failure that its paradigms about terrorism, tactics of counter insurgency, approaches to peace-building and development have only paved way for unchecked genocide by the Sri Lankan state.

 

Sections in the international system is attempting to dilute the crime of genocide as war crimes on both sides so that the matter could be twisted and diffused ultimately saving State in the island. But, for countries including India and China, no case for even war crimes exists in Sri Lanka.

 

‘Either the genocide should be complete and conclusive, or let the Tamils organize another resistance if they can,’ is the attitude with which the Sinhala state is operating.

 

So far, the response of the international system is that with the paradigm of ‘multi-culturalism’, 'development' and ‘some accountability’, the national question of Tamils in the island can be resolved.

 

In the meantime, the Sri Lankan state has accelerated systematic colonisation of resourceful coastal and agricultural Tamil lands, and has been building infrastructure aimed at changing the demography, all in the name of 'development', which is abetted by a competing race by the powers engaged in the corporate colonial conquest of the island.

 

The international system fails or refuses to see that humiliation and structural genocide of Tamils by the Sinhala state have become ever more intense after the war, mainly assisted by the paradigms under which the international community is operating.

 

The Sri Lankan state and some members of the international system, mainly India, do not envisage significant constitutional changes in addressing the national question in the island. With the help of mobilizing a few ‘apologetic Tamils’ in the country and in the diaspora, they think the matter could be resolved with minor amendments in the constitution. A publicity campaign is already underway to emphasize that only such minor amendments are practically feasible.

 

The corporate colonial system is continuing to deny all space to Eezham Tamils for the negotiation of overlapping interests, but at the same time the system prefers to deal only with the Sinhala state which it finds more advantageous to its interests.

 

Denied of this direct negotiation space with the international system, the Tamils are forced into becoming ‘slaves to the slaves’, which means all options other than confrontation is closed for them, even one-year after the war.

 

To change this situation, much depends on the diaspora and on the people of Tamil Nadu in proving new geo-political realities, which the corporate colonialists of India as well as the international system, cannot ignore.

 

Further, the policy makers, peace-builders, development experimentalists and the NGO actors of the West, will likely be evaluating their failures in bringing productive changes to good governance in Sri Lanka, and will be driven to design a policy that incorporates having active dialogue with the grassroots of the Tamil diaspora.

 

The policy makers and the development experimentalists should realise that forging reconciliation with their own Tamil citizens of the grassroots in their countries, still caught in trauma, is of paramount importance, before embarking upon manipulating and 'educating' the Tamil elite on 'reconciliation' and 'development' with the exclusivist Sinhala Buddhist state in the island.

 

The Sri Lankan state has been using set of paradigms to shape its roadmap and conduct the State's programme against the cause of Eezham Tamils. These include, ‘War for Peace’, ‘Eliminating Terrorism’, ‘Post-LTTE scenario’, ‘Sri Lanka free from minorities’, ‘Co-existence as Sri Lankans’, ‘Development of East’ and ‘Development of North.'

 

Paradigms adopted by various actors explain the way these actors wish to perceive the world of their own and the tactics they deploy to advance their objectives.

 

‘War on Terrorism’, ‘Counter Insurgency’, ‘Peace-building’, ‘Post-conflict Reconciliation’, ‘Development’ and the shade of NGO-culture promoted in recent years are some examples of how the International Establishment, blamed for 'corporate colonialism', has chosen to perceive and act on its world.

 

The Sri Lankan state, playing the geopolitical card, has enjoyed the flexibility of these readily available paradigms that have enabled confluence of Colombo’s interests with those of the powers. The net result of this confluence of paradigms is nothing other than Colombo sustaining a politico-military environment in its favour to effect a systematic programme of Tamil subjugation, a continued genocide in the island.

 

At this juncture, the Tamil diplomacy of the future should be shaped, by understanding the paradigms, and by finding ways to address the conflicts between the Tamil perspectives and the perspectives of the forged interests resulting from the paradigms of Colombo and the International Establishment.

 

Tamil polity's duty is to address the concerned global community and enlighten this community on the Tamil perspectives on reconciliation, development, peace-building and its aspired independence. An attitudinal change is urgently needed in the way the international system is approaching the Tamil national question.

 

In the changed context of the modus operandi of Tamil struggle, the Tamil nation now needs to adopt strategies for ‘alternative development’ and building ‘social capital’ with carefully designed networks at home, in the diaspora, and in Tamil Nadu to enable the Tamils in the island to resist subjugation.

 

At the same time, Tamils should focus on concrete actions at country, regional and alternative levels, exposing Sri Lankan state’s objective and plans of continued genocide.

 

Proving genocide is a long and hard process. Modern and technologically powerful approaches are available in our times to document the genocide. The Tamil polity has to be systematic, strategic and engage in result-oriented projects, building and documenting evidence of genocide.

 

New and energetic resources from Tamil diaspora should emerge, as the activists engaged in the old paradigm are increasingly succumbing to sectarian politics, old tactics and 'surrender diplomacy'.

 

Tamils should be diligent to avoid interference and exploitation by agencies of vested interest in diluting diaspora's determination to pursue genocide documentation project . They should be particularly aware of the institutions that have been part of the War on Terrorism baggage of the past.

 

The Sri Lankan state has demonstrated to the world that genocide is possible under the camouflage of Counter Insurgency and the ‘War against Terrorism’.

 

Colombo has used large sums of money on PR agencies and disinformation networks to carry out a systematic disinformation campaign against the Tamil struggle. Tamils world over have been systematically targeted and projected as supporting a ‘terrorist cause’.

 

The democratic Tamil institutions, currently being built at country level and at a trans-national level, now bear the responsibility to demonstrate their capacity, by organizing evidence collection to establish genocide, building the needed global awareness, and in seeking concrete legal results.

 

The Permanent People’s Tribunal on Sri Lanka, which held investigations on War Crimes in January 2010 in Dublin, highlighted the conduct of the European Union in undermining the Ceasefire Agreement of February 2002 to list the Tamil resistance movements as terrorist organizations in 2006. The Tribunal observed further that the EU had acted under pressure from the United States and the United Kingdom, despite being aware of the detrimental consequences to a peace process in the making.

 

The PPT has raised awareness on an important theme: Peace Crimes.

 

During the previous paradigm, the Tamil aspiration of independent Tamil Eelam was interpreted falsely as an exclusivist and 'terrorist' demand. The LTTE was made a legal target of proscriptions in various countries, even while the movement was engaged in a peace process and remained de-proscribed in Sri Lanka. As a result the concept of Tamil Eelam was made a political taboo in some quarters.

 

Meanwhile, some academics and long-term activists associated with the LTTE in the West, were exposed to a given shade of the 'NGO culture', which was operating within the paradigm of ‘peace-building by engaging the spoilers’ and abetting the Peace Crimes.

 

That the NGO agenda was carefully designed to weaken both the Sinhala and Tamil nationalisms in the island, became clearly evident later.

 

The international system chose to view the Tamil diaspora as a 'spoiler' to its 'peace-building'. It failed to view the Tamil diaspora as a partner with a positive integration experience in its own system.

 

The diaspora Tamils were viewed as ‘LTTE sympathisers’. Addressing the LTTE was addressing the diaspora, it was thought, and not the opposite.

 

The international system viewed the political mobilisation in the diaspora through the paradigm of Counter Insurgency of the War on Terrorism, making Tamils wonder whether the approach of peace-building being promoted was a subordinate tactic of a counter insurgency warfare at a global level. The Tamil diaspora was made the subject for model studies on how the diasporas were sustaining the 'insurgencies'.

 

Instead of effecting an attitudinal change in the exclusivist Sinhala Buddhist nationalism during the peacemaking, the international system sought to effect peacebuilding by seeking to weaken the inclusive and positive Tamil nationalism, which was also benefiting from the integrated Tamil diaspora.

 

The international system is now aware that the result of its approach was counter-productive.

 

The Sinhala Buddhist nationalism destroyed the de-facto state of Tamil Eelam and its conventional fighting force.

 

Immediately after the war, Colombo stepped up its counter-insurgency warfare in Europe and Asia by appointing military commanders who were in service as Ambassadors to the countries of Malaysia and Germany.

 

The Tamils in the diaspora, despite all the trends running against them, unanimously voiced for their aspiration within the last one-year, leaving no room for doubts or manipulations by re-mandating the main principle of Vaddukkoaddai Resolution, an independent and sovereign Tamil Eelam, through referendum in 10 countries.

 

The diaspora has come forward in creating democratically elected representatives at country level and in safeguarding the polity at trans-national level, transforming the struggle for Tamil Eelam into a politico-democratic struggle supported by the intellectual, political and financial capital of the million strong Tamil disapora which has assuredly matured into an independent force.

 

The Sri Lankan state and its abettors did not anticipate this organizational capacity of the Tamil diaspora.

 

Even today, a systematic campaign is directed against the three-tier efforts of Eezham Tamil Diaspora, the Global Tamil Forum (GTF), the democratically elected country councils in countries like Switzerland and the emerging Transnationational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) as “LTTE threat against Sri Lanka from abroad."

 

Still affected by trauma, Tamils are undertaking a peaceful democratic transformation of their cause. International community must be cognizant that diaspora is sufficiently resilient, and possess national memory and archived knowledge to carry the struggle forward to posterity, if necessary, until a fair and just solution is reached. Unjust application of paradigms, to make Tamils victims again, will only be counter productive to world order.

 

The State Department, Foreign Ministries, Development Ministries, the shade of NGO culture promoted by them and the Counter Insurgency agencies – all have a moral responsibility to look at the crisis also through the Tamil point of view if they want to really resolve the problems of Tamils. 

The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam held its 3 day inaugural meeting on May 17, 18 and 19 across three global locations.

 

 

87 of 115 representatives of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) already declared elected from 11 countries met in the US city of Philadelphia, in London and in Geneva.

 

The Tamil Eelam flag was hoisted and a representative from each country addressed the public stating that the goal of the TGTE should be the formation of independent and sovereign state of Tamil Eelam in the North and East of the island of Sri Lanka.

 

The elected representatives resolved to draft the constitution of the TGTE within 3 months and set up an Interim Executive Committee (IEC) constituting 8 members.

 

Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran from USA was appointed as the Interim Chief Executive of the IEC.

 

Gerard Francis, Janarthanan Pulendran, Mahinthan Sivasubramanium, Rudrakumaran Visuvanathan, Sam Sangarasivam, Sasithar Maheswaran, Selva Selvanathan and Vithya Jeyashanker were named as the members of the IEC.

 

Pon. Balarajan from Canada was unanimously elected as the Speaker of the Assembly.

 

47 TGTE members (including 24 from Canada and 10 from US) attended the session in Philadelphia, 14 in London, 12 in Geneva and others joined from their constituencies.

 

The TGTE members have discussed about setting up sub committees for Drafting Constitution, Education, Health, Sports and Culture in homeland, Economic Development in homeland, International Relations, War crimes and Human Rights in homeland, Women, Children and Elders in homeland, Business Development, Heroes' Families, Prisoners of War, Resource Protection in homeland and Youth Participation.

 

The exact composition of the sub-committees are yet to be finalised, reports said.

 

Reports said a conducive atmosphere was created in the 3-day session, despite earlier problems and allegations of disputes.

 

William Ramsey Clark, a former US Attorney General, was one of the keynote speakers of the inaugural event. He characterized the move to form the transnational government a "brave initiative to find the wisdom and the courage to achieve - as it was for many centuries - a free and independent Tamil Eelam."

 

82-year-old Clark, who was a prominent figure in the anti-Vietnam War movement, was the Election Commissioner of the TGTE elections held in the USA.

 

"I need to tell you that your challenge is enormous […] Freedom is possible. But you have to work awfully hard at it. And you have to be right. You have to convince other people that you are right. […] You need to know your history. You need to persist your history and need to have your history understood that you were a uniquely different people than the Sinhalese on the same island," Clark said.

 

"Resolve your differences together openly and frankly wherever it occurs outright and quickly, and abide by the agreement that you reach," Mr. Clark said elaborating how the American nation was made possible with unity as an unprecedented force to achieve independence. "To divide and conquer a dispersed people is an easy thing to do," he warned.

 

Francis Boyle, a professor of international law, Domach Wal Ruach, the secretary general of Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) USA and Janani Jananayagam, a British Tamil activist engaged in awareness campaign on Tamil genocide were the other speakers in the inauguration ceremony.

 

Congratulating the members of TGTE, Domach Wal Ruach of the SPLM-USA said: "Although results are not seen overnight, I think what you have done now is a step towards right direction. We have been there and we are getting close to it now. The struggle is not easy. There are setbacks. But, you have to be steadfast. You owe it to the young generation. If you don't do it now, no-one else would do it and the entire generations would be lost."

 

"I want to tell you that, through collective work, diaspora is one of the component. Our leader commanded the largest single rebel groups ever. And yet, we were not able to win, militarily," he said and added: "The most important organic guarantee that you could always have, is your diaspora."

 

Explaining the history of the Sudanese struggle and how the SPLM organized the diapora in grass-root level, he claimed that the USA had done magnificent help to Sudanese. "I don't think we could have done this without the United States of America," he told the TGTE members who were gathered at the Philadelphia National Constitution Centre (NCC). "They helped us so much. I want to thank them again once more. The peace agreement is still unimplemented, but we are hopeful that in January next year, we will be an independent state," he said. "That [the independence] has cost us 2.5 millions of peoples lives, dead."

 

Ms. Karen Parker, a Humanitarian Law attorney and an Advisory Committee member, addressed the Constitutional Assembly on its functions.

 

Professor N. Sriskandajarah from Sweden, a member of the advisory panel, who had set the agenda for the inaugural session in advance and facilitated the sessions, proposed to have the Advisory Panel functioning till the Constitution Assembly completes the drafting of the constitution.

 

The agenda for the three days, announced in advance, was: "The elected body will be transformed into a Constituent Assembly, an Interim Chief Executive and a small executive committee to manage this process elected, important themes for the Constituent Assembly discussed, agreed on and teams created, and a number of working groups for important and immediate tasks also elected."

 

Meanwhile, elections were held in NSW, Australia, and 4 members elected to the TGTE on 22 May. All other Australian representatives were elected unopposed. The Australia representatives are Sanchayan Kulasegaram (NSW), Seran Sribalan (NSW), Dharshan Gunasingam (NSW), Prabhakaran Balasingham (NSW), Janani Balachandran (Victoria), Dominic Savio Santhiapillai (Victoria), Shanmuganathakumar Thuraisingam (Victoria), Selvanathan Eliyathamby (Queensland), Apiramy Visuvanathan (ACT/Tasmania) and Kanagadram Manickavasagar (WA/SA/NT).

As Tamils world over mark one-year of the Indian abetted genocidal war against Eelam Tamils in the island of Sri Lanka, the Hindi film industry known as Bollywood and the major Indian conglomerate of trade unions, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (FICCI) are joining hands with Rajapaksa regime in Colombo in staging 11th International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) awards weekend during the first week of June in Colombo.

 

The FICCI, the largest and oldest business conglomerate of India is the flagship organiser of the business event named FICCI-IIFA Global Business Forum, where hundreds of CEOs and business heads from India would be signing various investment contracts and tie-ups in the island on the second day of the celebrity and corporate event.

 

The announcement of Colombo as the venue was followed by some questionable humanitarian initiatives.

 

Salman Khan, a prominent Hindi actor, who was invited to be the brand ambassador of the IIFA Charity Initiative, made the announcement of the venue by saying that he was to build 100 houses in Jaffna for Tamil refugees with his ‘Being Human’ foundation and was named as ambassador of change. Hand for Habitat and UNICEF were also mentioned as cooperating humanitarian agencies during the announcement.

 

Another ‘interesting’ feature announced is the IIFA Foundation Celebrity Cricket Match, to be held between Indian celebrities and ‘Sri Lankan’ cricketers.

 

The cricket match, to be held on June 4, has been profiled as ‘cricket for change’ to collect funds to rehabilitate former child soldiers. The duo turned foes of Bollywood, Salman Khan and Shahrukh Khan, are to play together in the cricket match.

 

Sri Lanka is today India’s largest trading partner in SAARC.  The Indian Establishment, locked in a corporate race with China, has been pushing Colombo to finalise the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), which it wants signed when Mahinda Rajapaksa visits India on June 8, scheduled after the IIFA-Weekend.

Furthermore, India, which backed Sri Lanka's war is keen to show that Sri Lanka is in the process of normalisation following the end of war to avoid its neighbour coming under any war crimes investigation.

 

It is under these circumstances, the Hindi film industry is being blamed for promoting Indian corporate interests in Colombo.

However, the Indian move has sparked protests from Tamils in Tamil Nadu, Mumbai and the Diaspora.

 

Tamil film industry in Tamil Nadu has declared non-cooperation with the Bollywood film industry, said activists in Chennai, urging Tamils in the Diaspora to exert pressure on Bollywood market overseas.

 

A joint statement was issued by the film industries in South India on Friday not to release films of those Indian actors and technicians who attend the India International Film Academy' 2010 event. IIFA 2010 will be held between June 3 to 5.

 

Apart from jeopardising the South Indian screening of films the order also threatens the release of Tamil films that feature the actors who attend the festival.

 

The primary demand remains that the venue of the festival be changed, to condemn Sri Lanka for its atrocities against Tamils. An order has also been issued to not shoot South Indian films henceforth in the island country, nor hold cultural events. A 15member team from the South Indian Film Chamber of Commerce will be leaving for Mumbai on Saturday to persuade the IIFA team to shift its venue.

 

All Tamil actors, who received invitation from the event organizers, turned down the request, as an order was passed earlier by the Tamil film industry stating it would completely ignore the event.

Executions of Tamil civilians and surrendered LTTE fighters and their families were carried out under orders ‘from the top’, Sri Lankan Army soldiers have claimed.

 

"Yes, our commander ordered us to kill everyone. We killed everyone," claimed on frontline soldier.

 

"Definitely, the order would have been to kill everybody and finish them off,” a senior Sri Lankan army commander said.

 

"I don't think we wanted to keep any hardcore elements, so they were done away with. It is clear that such orders were, in fact, received from the top."

 

The allegations were made in a report on Britain’s Channel 4 TV station, which broadcast two interviews with Sri Lankan Army soldiers.

 

The soldier confirmed he took part in the killing of innocent civilians. Surrendering LTTE fighters and their families were also tortured and executed, he said.

 

Several photographs were shown on the extended segment shown on Channel 4’s news programme.

 

Pictures were taken by soldiers on the frontline of the war zone and showed piles of bodies, lines of corpses and civilians in ditches with their hands tied behind their backs, including children.

 

They also broadcast pictures of the bodies of young women who had their hands tied behind their backs, suggesting that they were detained and executed.

 

The program quoted a soldier as saying that Pirabaharan’s youngest son, Balachandran (13), was shot dead after surrendering to the forces with his bodyguards.

 

One of the civilians in the photographs was subsequently identified by his wife, a displaced person currently living in Jaffna, TamilNet reported.

 

The unidentified woman claims her husband was a former member of the LTTE but was staying with his family after leaving the organisation.

 

He disappeared in April 2009, and has since been reported dead by villagers who saw his body together with bodies of LTTE fighters massacred by the Sri Lankan forces.

 

This raises the question whether all those who were pictured as detained by the army have been executed, said local reports from Jaffna.

 

Louis Arbour, head of the International Crisis Group and former Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, who was also interviewed by the program, slammed the impunity Sri Lanka enjoyed throughout the conflict.

 

She said there was no possibility of Sri Lanka holding a proper inquiry into the war crimes, noting that since the conflict began there had been impunity.

 

A senior Amnesty International official told Channel 4 News his organisation had this week launched a world-wide campaign to highlight the need for an independent international investigation into war crimes in Sri Lanka.

 

London-based Amnesty International and New York-based Human Rights Watch have joined Brussels-based International Crisis Group in this regard, Channel 4 said.

 

The Sri Lankan ambassador to the UN, Palitha Kohona had agreed to appear on the show to do the increasingly difficult task of defending his government, but news anchor Jon Snow revealed, despite desperate efforts to locate him, he failed to show up.

 

The Sri Lankan High Commission in London meanwhile issued a statement totally rejecting all accusations.

 

“All internationally accepted standards and norms of such operations were followed in the prosecution of the humanitarian operation by the security forces which were under strict orders to follow a zero civilian casualty policy,” the High Commission statement claimed.

The Sri Lankan government's suggestion that a newly announced commission will provide accountability for laws-of-war violations during the armed conflict with the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is yet another attempt to deflect an independent international investigation, Human Rights Watch said. Human Rights Watch urged United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to take steps to ensure accountability through an independent international investigation into the alleged laws-of-war violations.

 

The announcement of a commission on "lessons learnt and reconciliation" came after a months-long campaign by the Sri Lankan government to prevent Ban from establishing a panel of experts to advise him on accountability in Sri Lanka. In May 2009, after the war ended, President Mahinda Rajapaksa signed a joint communiqué with Ban promising that "the government will take measures to address allegations related to violations of international humanitarian and human-rights law." But no substantive steps have been taken.

 

"Every time the international community raises the issue of accountability, Sri Lanka establishes a commission that takes a long time to achieve nothing," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Ban should put an end to this game of smoke and mirrors and begin a process that would ensure justice for all the victims of Sri Lanka's war."

 

The government has yet to publish the findings from a committee established in November 2009 to examine allegations of laws-of-war violations, despite an April 2010 deadline. When the committee was announced, Human Rights Watch warned that it was just a smokescreen to avoid accountability.

 

According to conservative UN estimates, 7,000 civilians were killed and more than 13,000 injured from January to May, 2009. Other estimates suggest that as many as 20,000 were killed. Government officials, including the president, have repeatedly insisted that no violations by government forces took place, and the government has taken no meaningful steps to ensure accountability.

 

On May 6, 2010, the Sri Lankan government announced that it will establish a commission to report on the lessons learned from the conflict and reconciliation efforts. In a statement posted on the government's website, the government announced that "there will be the [sic] search for any violations of internationally accepted norms of conduct in such conflict situations, and the circumstances that may have led to such actions, and identify any persons or groups responsible for such acts." The statement said nothing about holding such persons accountable under Sri Lankan criminal law or what other steps would be taken against those found to have been acting in violation of Sri Lankan or international law.

 

According to the government statement, the committee will consist of seven Sri Lankans, located in Sri Lanka and abroad, but will have no international involvement.

 

"Genuine government efforts with broad participation to promote reconciliation should be supported," Adams said. "But this cannot succeed without genuine and good faith efforts at accountability."

 

Sri Lanka has a long history of establishing ad hoc commissions to deflect international criticism over its poor human rights record and widespread impunity, Human Rights Watch said. Since independence in 1948, Sri Lanka has established at least 10 such commissions, none of which have produced any significant results.

 

The Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed in November 2006 to investigate serious cases of alleged human rights abuses by both sides was a complete failure. A group of international experts, appointed to ensure the investigation was being conducted according to international norms and standards, resigned in 2008 because it had "not been able to conclude...that the proceedings of the Commission have been transparent or have satisfied basic international norms and standards."

 

In June 2009, Rajapaksa dissolved the Presidential Commission of Inquiry, even though it had conducted investigations in just 7 of its 16 mandated major human rights cases. The president has not published its report.

 

This week's announcement of a new commission came after weeks of attempts by the Sri Lankan government to prevent Ban from establishing a panel of experts. After Ban informed Rajapaksa on March 5 that the secretary-general intended to establish an expert panel to advise him on accountability in Sri Lanka, the Sri Lankan government fiercely protested the decision, denouncing it as "uncalled for" and "unwarranted."

 

Ban has yet to appoint any members to the panel or announce its terms of reference.

 

"Secretary-General Ban should not let Sri Lanka bully and manipulate him into abandoning justice for Sri Lanka's war victims," Adams said. "It is time for him to demonstrate that he is squarely on the side of the victims of Sri Lanka's long war."  

The United Nations actions during and after the brutal war in Sri Lanka has been questionable and now the International Crisis Group (ICG) has called for an investigation into the world body's own behaviour in relation to Sri Lanka and Tamils.  

 

Delay

 

Despite calls an enquiry, the world body continues to inactive when it comes to matters relating to Sri Lanka.

 

A prime example of UN inaction is the appointment of a panel of experts to advice the Secretary General on Sri Lanka.

 

On March 5, 2010 Ban announced he would name a panel "without delay", however ten and a half weeks later, he has not done so.

 

This has led political observers to question how long it takes the UN to name a panel of experts.

 

However, the UN Secretary General is still going ahead with the appointment of an expert panel on Sri Lanka, according to UN spokespersons.

 

Changing remit

 

In addition to the delay, it appears the remit of the panel has also been reduced.

 

Initially when Ban announced his plan to set up an expert panel, he stated: "I made clear to President Rajapaksa that I intend to move forward on a Group of Experts which will advise me on setting the broad parameters and standards on the way ahead on establishing accountability."

 

However, according to latest media reports, quoting a spokesperson for Ban, the expert panel will now only advice the UN Secretary General himself  on the standards are for a credible domestic investigation or inquiry.

 

"The panel will address the question of accountability that's been discussed very often. So it has the very specific aim to advise the Secretary-General on the extent to which a domestic Sri Lankan inquiry will meet widely held standards for that kind of inquiry," the UN Chief's spokesperson Martin Nesirky said.

 

Sri Lanka's commission

 

With the UN taking its time on naming a panel, Sri Lanka announced its own ‘Commission on Lessons Learned and Reconciliation’ to examine key aspects of the conflict. 

 

The delay in the UN Secretary General announcing a panel and the change in remit has led to questions on whether it related to Sri Lanka's belated unveiling of its own "mechanism."

 

According to a UN spokesperson, the setting up of a commission by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to investigate alleged incidents which took place during the war would not substitute the need for a panel of experts to brief the UN Chief on accountability issues relating to Sri Lanka.

She also said President Rajapaksa’s commission and the UN Chief’s expert panel were two different concepts due to which Ban would not reconsider appointing his panel.

“President Rajapaksa can appoint whatever he wants. His commission has nothing to do with Mr. Ban Ki-Moon’s panel,” she said.

 

However, political observers questioned how the UN panel would have nothing to do with Rajapaksa appointed commission when the new remit of UN panel is to advice on standards for a credible domestic investigation.

 

New York based  Inner City Press which has been following UN's role in Sri Lanka in one article questioned "How could a panel named by Mahinda Rajapaksa investigate war crimes claims made against his own brother?"

 

"Would the UN accept, for example, Sudan's UN Ambassador investigating claims against Omar al-Bashir?" it further asked.

Probe not panel

 

If and when appointed, the UN experts’ panel is not expected to be effective as the panel would only "advise the Secretary General on the extent to which a domestic inquiry in Sri Lanka would meet normal standards."

 

So, the delayed UN panel would not even be responsive to the calls for investigation made by ICG, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and others.

 

Considering the nature and scale of the human suffering that unfolded in Sri Lanka, the UN should have appointed an independent international probe to investigate any possible crimes against humanity.  

 

When 150 people were killed in Guinea, the UN Secretary General setup an international probe to look into it, however after the death of over 50,000 Tamils and incarceration of 300, 000 more he is only setting up a panel of experts, charge observers.  

 

UN conduct

 

With actions, that are in best case seen as incompetent and worst case seen as blatantly biased, Ban Ki-moon and the UN have justifiably come under attack by rights groups, with the ICG calling for a probe into UN's conduct in Sri Lanka.

 

In a report published on May 17, the ICG called for an inquiry into the UN's own behaviour.

 

Specifically, the organisation wants an investigation into "the conduct of the UN during the last year of the conflict, examining the UN’s September 2008 withdrawal from Kilinochchi through to its ineffectual attempts to push for a ceasefire and its involvement in Sri Lankan government internment camps."

"The scale of civilian deaths and suffering demands a response. Future generations will demand to know what happened, and future peace in Sri Lanka requires some measure of justice." according to ICG's President Louise Arbour.

 

No confidence

 

Tamils inside and outside Sri Lanka lost confidence in the UN when it pulled out of Kilinochchi in September 2008. Nothing the UN has done since then has helped rebuild that broken confidence.

 

"Tamils who are following the Ban Ki-moon's expert panel drama should not hold their breath hoping for justice from the world body", was the advice of a Tamil political commentator  from the Diaspora.

 

"The UN, is a place filled with member states engaged in horse trading and officials looking after their self interests", the commentator added.

 

An Inner City Press comment on UN behaviour relating Sri Lanka reinforced this view: "The UN and Ban backed down, in the view of many, in the face of push back by Sri Lanka and certain of its allies which have a say in Ban Ki-moon's second term."

Tamils across the globe commemorated the first anniversary of the end of the Mulliyavaikkal massacre and marked 18 May as ‘War Crimes Day’.

 

In the US, more than four hundred Tamils held a remembrance rally in Washington D.C. "We had the event at the very heart of the Nation built on promise of freedom and justice; we demonstrated first in front of the White House, and after a one mile procession, at the reflecting pool adjoining the Lincoln memorial to symbolize and demonstrate our resolve that we will never forget this atrocity, and that until we bring the perpetrators of this dastardly crimes, we will not rest," Dr Jeyarajah, the main organizer of the event said.

 

"Today we stand united as one community remembering the Tamils of Sri lanka who were massacred by evil. What kind of evil murders over 40,000 civilians in one weekend? Over 100,000 Tamils in the last 20 years," Dr. Ellyn Shander, a key member of the US Tamil Political Action Group (USTPAC) who spoke at the event asked.

 

"Before their deaths, many of the murdered people begged, "Help us, save us, tell our story.”

 

"They sent their messages out in eyewitness videos, through the brave doctors during the siege, and through the occasional Tamil who escaped from the fighting. They wanted the world to know about their suffering, their horror and their sacrifice.. They held the hope until the very end that the civilized world would somehow come to their rescue. The truth of the premeditated genocide was inconceivable.

 

"They believed that the United States or India would stop the carnage.. But sadly no one came.. No one helped. No one responded to their pleas. And no one stopped the Sri Lankan government from burning their bodies and hiding the evidence," Dr Shander said.

 

Jan Jananayagam, British representative of US-based group "Tamils Against Genocide (TAG)" and who contested as an independent candidate in the the 2009 European Parliament, speaking to the attendees, noting that Vanni has represented to Tamil people "hope and freedom," said: "[i]n the final years as the Sri Lankan army came North, tens of thousands of Tamil people fled to Vanni, converging from every direction into this symbolic centre of Tamil Eelam.

 

"They too chose the hope of freedom over the certainty of repression. But the promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness has been cruelly betrayed,” Jananayagam said.

 

Dr. Ilangkovan, a retired physician, also appealed to Tamils in Tamil Nadu to join in masses to take the struggle forward.

 

While the conventional war has ended, the next phase of struggle has just begun in the many lands across the seas from the shores of Sri Lanka where the Tamils were treated worse than animals, Jeyarajah told TamilNet.

 

"The psychological trauma of witnessing their own relatives, friends and neighbors suffering, will linger for generations in Tamils' psyche and, the State's attempts at erasing the physical evidence will only firmly imprint the horrific images in expatriates' minds. We hope, this will propel all expatriate Tamils to unite and work towards exposing Sri Lanka State to international justice.

 

"Tamil expatriates should shun talks of development and reconciliation, which some of the powers are attempting to do, until accountability for the genocidal crime is established," Jeyarajah said.

 

In Norway, representatives of political parties participated and spoke in the gathering organized by the Norwegian Council of Eelam Tamils (NCET). The commemoration event took place on 18 May in Oslo, beginning at 18:00 with silent prayer in remembrance of those killed in the war on Vanni, followed by speeches on behalf of NCET on the needs of Eelam Tamils, the victims of an ethnic genocide.

 

In Canada, more than 15,000 people gathered in Toronto in front of Queens Park Parliament, where representatives of several humanitarian organizations pledged their support to the Tamils’ cause.

 

In Italy, a 25 km demonstration march commemorating the massacre began around 8:00 and ended at 17:00. More than 10,000 handbills were distributed during the march, which was organized by Italy West Region Tamil Youths Organization. Representatives of UN humanitarian organizations, Amnesty International, political parties, unions and other humanitarian organizations participated in the meeting that followed the march.

 

In France, a similar march organized by France Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO) started at 15:30 and terminated at Humans Rights Square around 17:30. In the public meeting which followed the march political leaders Vovard Jacques, Jacques Fabres, Capitano and TRO coordinator spoke.

 

In Switzerland, more than 1,500 Tamils took part in the remembrance event named "Chivantha" May (Blood-soaked May), organized by the Switzerland Council of Eelam Tamils (SCET).

 

Switzerland representative of the Sudanese political movement voicing against the genocide in Darfur and Green Party politician Zefari Zidun, explained how his people experienced the genocide in Darfur and said there was no struggle that has been won without experiencing major political setbacks. Mr. Zidun underlined the significance of the awareness work engaging the global community in solidarity action.

 

A dance theatre presented the geopolitical injustice experienced by Tamils, depicting how the war against Tamils was abetted by the powers of the world.

 

Christoph Wiedmer, the project director of the Swiss based international human rights organisation, Society for Threatened Peoples (STP), addressed the gathering.

 

Twenty-six democratically elected members of the SCET took oath in front of the masses, who gathered at Helvetia in Zurich in an emotional remembrance event. The president of the SCET, Tharsika Pakeerathan, a computer science student coordinated the joint remembrance and inauguration event, concluded emotionally with the reggae song by Bob Marley: "Get up, stand up, stand up for your rights."

The United Nations human rights chief, Navaneetham Pillay on 31 May reiterated her call for an "independent international probe" into Sri Lanka Government's final offensive against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam during the final months of the war in 2009.

 

While noting the appointment of "post-war reconciliation commission" by Colombo, Navi Pillay said, "based on previous experience and new information, I remain convinced that such objectives [looking into alleged human rights violations, and provide justice to victims] would be better served by establishing an independent international accountability mechanism that would enjoy public confidence, both in Sri Lanka and elsewhere," AFP reported.

 

Pillay assessed that some progress has been made since the end of the conflict in the return and resettlement of displaced people, according to AFP.

 

"Concrete initiatives must now follow to provide justice and redress to victims and generally to promote accountability and longer-term reconciliation," AFP quoted Navi Pillay as saying.

 

"Yet another feckless commission is a grossly inadequate response to the numerous credible allegations of war crimes," said Elaine Pearson, acting Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

 

"Damning new evidence of abuses shows why the UN should not let Sri Lanka sweep these abuses under the carpet," added Pearson in an HRW media release.

 

The commission is to be headed by former attorney general Chitta Ranjan de Silva, and includes two Tamil members.

 

"De Silva was the architect and enforcer of the attorney general's conflict of interest role with respect to the 2006 commission," said Arthur Dewey, former US assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration and member of the IIGEP [International Independent Group of Eminent Persons].

 

"Nothing good for human rights or reconciliation is likely to come from anything in which De Silva is involved," said HRW report quoting Dewey.

 

“Evidence gathered by Crisis Group provides reasonable grounds to believe that during these months [the security forces intentionally and repeatedly shelled civilians, hospitals and humanitarian operations,” New York Times said quoting from the text of the ICG report, and added that “[i]t [the report] also provides reason to believe that senior government and military officials were aware of the massive civilian casualties due to the security forces’ attacks, but failed to protect the civilian population as they were obliged to under the laws of war.”

 

State run Daily News listed the objectives of the Colombo appointed Commission as follows:

i. the facts and circumstances which led to the failure of the Ceasefire Agreement operationalized on February 21, 2002 and the sequence of events that followed thereafter up to May 19, 2009;

 

ii. whether any person, group, or institution directly or indirectly bear responsibility in this regard;

 

iii. the lessons we would learn from those events and their attendant concerns, in order to ensure that there will be no recurrence;

 

iv. the methodology whereby restitution to any person affected by those events or their dependents or to heirs, can be effected;

 

v. the institutional administrative and legislative measures which need to be taken in order to prevent any recurrence of such concerns in the future, and to promote further national unity and reconciliation among all communities, and to make any such other

 

"The text describing the mandate of the commission reflects the farcity of the exercise. The language avoids any mention of "human rights violations," leave alone the mention of "war crimes," and many reputable NGOs have dismissed the Commission as a "sham." However, some members of the civilized world have given cautious acceptance, and this would buy some time to the rogue state that wants the world to forget the massacres in Vanni. We hope that the Commissioner takes steps to follow up on her call and thereby add credibility to Kofi Annan's statement in NYT that "in the face of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, the default position of the international community is no longer impunity but accountability,"" said a spokesperson for the US-based activist group, Tamils Against Genocide (TAG).

 

A former UN spokesperson in Colombo, who was later evicted by Colombo, estimated that close to 40,000 Tamil civilians were killed by the Sri Lanka military during the final five months of the war. United Nations officials, despite having evidence, satellite images and on the ground casualty figures, concealed the details from outside world.

New evidence of human rights abuses committed by the Sri Lankan government during the last stages of the war last year have been uncovered by the New York based global rights monitor Human Rights Watch (HRW).

 

The evidence lead HRW to call for “an independent international investigation into violations of the laws of war” in a report released on its website.

 

HRW obtained evidence for these allegations of war crimes through first hand witness accounts through video and photo evidence obtained from Sri Lankan Army soldiers.

 

The organisation claimed it received over 200 photographs taken on mobile phones by members of the Sri Lankan Army’s Air Mobile Brigade on the frontlines of the battle zone in 2009.

 

One incident documented is the killing of a man, identified by independent sources as a member of the LTTE’s political wing from Jaffna.

 

In the sequential photos the man is shown first sitting and tied to a palm tree. His chest is covered in blood and his arm is in a sling, suggesting serious injury.

 

He is surrounded by men in military uniform, one of whom is brandishing a knife in the victims face.

 

In other pictures the victim is now seen in a ditch, clearly dead, covered in more blood. He is draped in a blood stained flag of Tamil Eelam.

 

There is material visible on his neck, which appears to originate from the back of his head.

 

This is “consistent in colour with brain matter which would indicate an injury to the back of his head, as nothing is visible which would cause this on his face,” said an analysis by an independent forensic analyst.

 

“This would indicate severe trauma to the back of the head consistent with something like a gunshot wound or massive blows to the back of the head with something such as a machete or axe," the expert said.

 

The evidence all but proves that the victim was tortured and then executed, said the HRW report.

 

Further pictures show several women in LTTE uniforms with their clothes partly removed, raising concern that there may have been sexual abuse or mutilation.

 

HRW states that these pictures don’t give conclusive evidence but highlight the necessity for an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes.

 

The report further describes witness accounts describing indiscriminate artillery barrages on civilian gatherings, including the shelling of a queue of women and children waiting for food distribution.

 

The report also documents witnesses who described forced recruitment by the LTTE.

 

HRW further highlights the failure of the government of Sri Lanka to investigate human rights abuses and war crimes allegations, and challenges the delay by the UN to launch its own investigation.

 

"[UN Secretary General] Ban's inaction is sending a signal to abusers that simply announcing meaningless commissions and making loud noises can block all efforts for real justice. The only way to ensure accountability in Sri Lanka is to establish an independent international investigation," Acting Asia director of HRW, Elaine Pearson said.

Around 75,000 Tamils, most of them of younger generation, attended the May Remembrance of Vanni massacre and the inauguration rally of Naam Thamilar political party at Virakanoor in the city of Madurai in the Tamil Nadu state of India, vowing to fight for the creation Tamil Eelam by politically capturing the power of the Tamil Nadu state as Tamils world over observed Genocidal War Crimes Day on Tuesday, May 18,  remembering thousands who perished one year ago.

 

“The Tamil Eelam struggle has been transcended into the hands of Tamil Nadu Tamils and the younger generation in particular,” S. Seeman, a Tamil activist and a popular film director told media.

 

“War is politics with bloodshed, our way would be Politics without bloodshed,’ he told the gathering vowing to take forward the struggle for the freedom of Eelam Tamils and to voice for global Tamil freedom.

 

"Annan [elder brother] Pirapaharan is the national leader of global Tamils and the Icon for Tamil liberation. We are all younger brothers of our Annan. I am not a chief, but a follower, someone among you,” he told reporters, introducing the party programme of Naam Thamilar (We are Tamils) at Virakanoor in Madurai.

Mr. Seeman, Professor Dheeran, Professor P. Ramasamy who is the deputy chief minister of the Penang state of Malaysia, Thamizharuvi Maniyan and Sahul Hameed delivered inauguration speeches at the event, which was conducted in a disciplined and organised way, very differently from that of the political rallies in the recent history of Tamil Nadu.

Another notable difference was the active participation of women.

The stage was named Muthukumaran Arangkam, commemorating the young Tamil journalist who burned himself to death condemning India for failing to stop the war in Sri Lanka January last year.

Naam Thamilar party holds the view that Tamil Eelam cannot be born without the Indian state of Tamil Nadu exerting meaningful pressure on the Central Government of India and that a Tamil political leadership should take over the rule of Tamil Nadu.

Mr. Seeman dismisses the ‘Dravidian’ parties as having failed in their historic duty of supporting the liberation of Tamil Eelam, when their help was most needed, especially one year ago during the height of the war.

“Unsurrendered Dignity and Unfallen Bravery,” is the slogan of the party launched with Tiger symbol on the day of one-year remembrance of Mu’l’livaaykkaal massacre.

A week earlier introduced a Tiger flag for the new political party. Stating that the Tiger was the emblem of the Tamil Chola dynasty, Mr. Seeman claimed that he evolved the idea adopting the Tiger flag inheriting it from the Chola dynasty and from his leader "Annan" (elder brother) Pirapaharan.

Mr. Seeman, while announcing the flag of the party stated:

"India wouldn't give you freedom without fighting for it. USA wouldn't come to liberate you. China and Japan wouldn't be useful. The Sinhalese wouldn't give in that easily. No state in the world would come to support the creation of Tamil Eelam."

"It is we, Tamils ourselves, who should enforce them all to support the establishment of Tamil Eelam."

"Let me remind you that Tamil Eelam cannot be born without the Indian state supporting it, and that the Indian state wouldn't support it as long as our own Tamil state of Tamil Nadu fails to demand it."

 

"Tamil Eelam is not homeland to only the Tamils of Eelam. It is the homeland of every Tamil human being in this world," he proclaimed.

When a Peoples Tribunal in Ireland has passed a verdict that Sri Lanka was guilty of War Crimes and that it should be investigated for genocide, why is the state assembly of Tamil Nadu, a state within the Indian Union, is unable to pass a resolution stating that Sri Lanka is guilty of genocide, he questioned.

"18 million Sinhalese may think they have conquered Tamils. We should remember 75 millions are here," he said.