Sri Lanka’s state-run Ceylon Petroleum Corporation hiked fuel prices in a response to galloping world crude oil prices as inflation accelerated for a fifth month in May.

 

Following the increase price of petrol at the pump will go up by 30 rupees to 157 rupees (1.47 dollars) whilst diesel will go up by 30 rupees to 110 rupees (1.02 dollars) per litre, the state-run monopoly fuel supplier said.

As a result of fuel price hikes, bus fares on the island were raised by as much as 27 percent on May 27.

 

This is the second time Sri Lanka has increased fuel prices this year. Last price hike was in January. Sri Lanka produces no oil and has been hit hard by soaring global crude prices, which have widened the trade gap and spurred 30 percent inflation in the 26 billion dollar economy.

 

Government efforts so far have failed to cool prices of food and fuel rising at the fastest pace in at least four years. Costlier military purchases to combat the separatist Tamil Tiger rebels have also fanned price gains.

 

Sri Lanka's 2008 inflation rate is likely to be ``significantly higher'' than previous estimates as oil price reaches record levels, the central bank said on May 26.

 

Consumer prices in the capital Colombo rose 26.2 percent from a year earlier, after increasing 25 percent in April, the statistics department said today. The median estimate of nine analysts in a Bloomberg survey was for a gain of 26.5 percent.

 

Governor Nivard Cabraal has kept borrowing costs at a six-year high to damp consumer spending and loan growth.

 

``A large part of the rise in inflation can be explained by surging international food and oil prices,'' said Prakriti Sofat, an economist at HSBC Holdings Plc in Singapore.

 

``Strong demand at home, the result of past policy looseness, is allowing retailers to pass on that cost to consumers.''

 

Central Bank of Sri Lanka said last month it was revising down its 2008 quarterly targets for reserve money, or the currency in circulation and commercial banks' deposits at the central bank, which would help slow consumer-price gains by ``containing the demand-driven component of inflation.''

 

The authority has also kept monetary policy tight by reducing the amount of cash in the banking system and controlling credit demand.

 

``The central bank has been restricting reserve money growth in a meaningful manner since September last year, which should help cool domestic demand and temper inflation over time,'' said Sofat.

 

``The benefits may be limited in the near term on account of rapidly rising commodity prices.''

 

The central bank, which this week kept its key interest rate unchanged at 10.5 percent for the 15th straight meeting, may need to consider increasing the proportion of deposits that commercial lenders must place with it or let the currency appreciate to cool runaway inflation, according to Fitch Ratings.

Journalists and media workers protesting against the attack on Sunday Leader editorial team member Noyahr.

A Tamil television journalist working an Sri Lanka army-held area in the northern Jaffna peninsula was hacked to death along with his friend on Wednesday evening when he was returning home from work, officials from the TV station said.

 

"Our Jaffna correspondent Paranerupasinghem Devakumar was hacked to death in the army-controlled area in Jaffna yesterday evening," said Susil Kindelpitiya, news director of the Maharaja Television and Radio, said on Thursday May 28.

 

The friend accompanying him, 24-year-old computer technician Mahendran Varadan, died later in hospital from the injuries he sustained in the attack.

 

A media rights groups condemned the killing and said the government's vociferous condemnations and promises of inquiries were meaningless without the will to push investigations forward.

 

Free Media Movement (FMM) an influential media rights group in a statement said, Devakumar is the ninth media worker to have been killed in Jaffna since 2006.

 

"It is with sickeningly increasing frequency that we are compelled to ask the government to take concrete measures to halt the killing, assault and intimidation of journalists in Sri Lanka," FMM statement said.

 

The FMM said none of the disappearances, abductions or murders of media workers have been probed and the perpetrators brought to justice.

 

Stressing that Devakumar’s murder was just the latest in a series of killings of journalists in the troubled Jaffna region, the Free Media Movement said condemnations and promises of investigations had no meaning “without the political will” to complete the investigations. “The repugnant impunity that aids and abets violence against journalists and media personnel must come to an end,” the FMM said.

 

According to Amnesty International, at least 10 Sri Lankan media workers have been killed over the past two years, while others have been abducted, tortured or illegally detained.

 

Most are Tamil journalists working in the ethnic Tamil majority areas of the north and east. Sinhalese journalists working in the south also face intimidation, particularly when reporting cases of graft, Amnesty said.

 

Reporters Without Borders expressed its outrage at the latest killing and said: “The government in Colombo must do everything possible to establish the circumstances of this murder and identity those responsible, so that it does not go unpunished as so many others have.”

 

Reporters Without Borders added: “Although no suspect has yet been found, the security forces should explain how this attack took place in an area of the peninsula that is supposed to be under close military control. The government is exposing both its inability and its lack of political will to protect journalists.”

 

The government has reportedly assigned three police teams to probe the incident. Priority could not be given to any hypothesis for the time being as Devakumar was known for covering both sides of the war between the government forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). He had not been criticised or threatened in the past and a personal motive cannot be ruled out.

 

Media rights watchdogs describe Sri Lanka as one of the most dangerous places in the world for journalists after Iraq.

 

On May 22, Keith Noyahr, a deputy editor of The Nation weekly, was abducted and severely beaten after criticising Colombo's war against LTTE.

 

Sri Lanka's defence secretary branded as "traitors" any journalists who wrote reports that could damage the security forces.

 

Journalists are barred from visiting front lines or areas held by the LTTE.

Heightened tension in the Batticaloa District, following clashes between the Tamil Makkal Vidudalai Puligal (TMVP) and the Muslims, is expected to cast its shadow on the June 4 maiden session of the newly elected Eastern Provincial Council.

 

Continuing skirmishes between the TMVP and a group of Muslim youths has compelled the police to impose local curfew. Two Muslim youth abducted last week, allegedly by the TMVP cadres, have still not been released, despite repeated appeals.

 

Intervention of senior Muslim politicians, both local and national, to diffuse the simmering situation, has so far failed to produce any positive results.

 

The TMVP is adamant not to release the two youths from Eravur.

 

TMVP’s refusal to release the abductees has sent a strong message to the rest of the country that, the party is ready to take on the Muslims, who the party suspects to have masterminded the assassination last week of Shanthan - a senior TMVP cadre in Kathankudi, reported The Bottom Line agency.

 

As TMVP cadres continue to go berserk in the Muslim hamlets in the east, threatening and intimidating Muslims, the police failed to bring the TMVP under control, resulting in Muslim youths and militants taking up arms against the TMVP.

 

While the TMVP cadres pose threats to the Muslims, the Muslim militants, on the other hand, have threatened to strike at Tamils living in some of the Muslim villages.

 

This has resulted in more than 400 to 500 Tamil families living in the border villages, fleeing to safer locations.

 

Already some 252 Tamil families have sought refuge at Thannamunai Punitha Valanar Vidyalaya and another 250 families at Mylampaveli Sri Vigneswara School.

 

The Government has, to date, not evolved a mechanism to issue dry rations and other relief to these people.

 

However, the TMVP has initiated a relief programme and begun distributing dry rations to the refugees.

 

Similarly, several hundreds of Muslims are also living in fear for the same reasons.

 

The police, to date, have not made any arrests in connection with the killing of Shanthan and his bodyguard Dharshan on 22 May. A native of Savalakadai in Amparai, Shanthan’s father was killed in a Tamil-Muslim conflict in the early 90s, after which Shanthan joined the Eelam Peoples Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF - Razeek group).

 

Former TMVP leader Karuna Amman appointed him to be in charge of the Ariyampathi division in Batticaloa. Shanthan functioned as the de facto chairman and delivered the goods to the people of the area. Shanthan also took a strong stance against Muslim colonisation within the division, resulting in a feud between him and the Muslim community.

 

Shanthan’s wife later contested the March 10 local polls and became the chairperson of the council, but according to local reports, her husband virtually ran the council. Shanthan was also a trusted lieutenant of the present Eastern Province chief minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan alias Pillaiyan.

 

Local intelligence sources point out that Shanthan’s killing in a predominantly Muslim area has not only led to suspicion, but is construed as a mischievous act aimed at triggering off fresh clashes between the Muslims and the Tamils.

 

A polarisation of the Tamils and the Muslims was widely speculated following the May 10 Eastern Provincial Councils election, as, for the first time, the ruling party fielded two chief ministerial candidates from both the Tamil and Muslim communities.

 

However, as anticipated, the communities, though worked separately to promote their respective candidates, did not enter into any sort of communal clashes.

 

A sudden outbreak of violence in Kathankudi is now viewed as an attempt by a few unknown elements to destabilise the east and portray the TMVP leader Pillaiyan as a weak leader, according to The Bottom Line.

 

It was following the killing of Shanthan and his bodyguard that, the TMVP cadres went berserk, spraying bullets at Muslims in Kathankudi. In this incident, three Muslims were killed, one was hacked to death and a Sinhalese sustained injuries.

 

The police were brought into the scene to bring law and order, to no avail. The Muslim clergy and other leading personalities made several appeals to the police to check on the armed TMVP cadres roaming the streets, but the police had no control.

 

It is at this point that Pillaiyan personally visited the Mosque in Kathankudi after Jumma prayers and assured protection for the Muslims. Pillaiyan’s assurance did not materialise in time to prevent TMVP cadres abducting two Muslim youths from Eravur.

 

The Interfaith Committee in Batticaloa and several other organisations immediately gathered together to diffuse the situation. They held a series of talks with Pillaiyan and his arch rival M.L.A.M. Hizbullah and pleaded with them to immediately bring the raging violence to a halt.

 

Hizbullah and Pillaiyan took personal interest to settle the issue by talking to their respective communities, but failed. Hizbullah even went to the extent of addressing a group of TMVP cadres at the Eravur police station, appealing them to release the abducted youths, to no avail.

 

Frustrated and angered by the delay in releasing the two Muslim youths, the youth in Eravur, defying an order from their elders, organised a hartal. The Mosque Federation made every attempt to convince the youth to abandon the hartal but the youth were already fired up. They demanded the immediate release of the youth or, face the consequences.

 

As civil societies from both communities were now looking for ways and means to quell the increasing tension, two more Muslims were allegedly abducted by the TMVP. However, intervention by civil societies led to the release of the two Muslims. They were handed over to the Eravur police after being beaten and bruised. They were later hospitalised.

 

Questions are raised as to why the police could not bring the situation under control, which has virtually brought a split between the two communities.

 

Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) general secretary and Eastern Provincial Councilor Hasan Ali said he was disappointed that the police had not moved forward to calm the situation but instead, had ignored certain burning issues, thereby, giving a free hand to an armed group to unleash violence against the Muslims.

 

Coming down hard on the police, he said that, under the law of the country, the police had the powers to arrest anyone found in possession of arms, but the police failed to arrest the armed TMVP cadres seen roaming the streets.

 

“The police is harassing us. The Government might suddenly say we are responsible for this situation. This, we predicted even before the election,” he said.

 

National Unity Alliance (NUA) Leader, Housing Minister Mrs. Ferial Ashraff admitted that there was ‘plenty of tension’ in the east and added it was high time that meaningful steps were taken to eradicate this irretrievably.

 

She said that the prevailing situation in the east was much worse than prior to the May 10 election.

 

She said that suspicion between the Muslims and the Tamils has been prevailing for a long time and added that, respective governments had failed to bridge the gap between these two communities.

 

“We are a people who have fighting blood in us and, I actually don’t know why we are fighting and for what. I don’t think anybody is trying to put these communities together. It is a cause of concern,” the Minister expressed.

 

She said the government is duty bound to intervene, to ensure matters do not get any worse. “We must see that violence is not accelerated,” she said.

 

Heightened tension in the Batticaloa District, following clashes between the Tamil Makkal Vidudalai Puligal (TMVP) and the Muslims, is expected to cast its shadow on the June 4 maiden session of the newly elected Eastern Provincial Council.

 

Continuing skirmishes between the TMVP and a group of Muslim youths has compelled the police to impose local curfew. Two Muslim youth abducted last week, allegedly by the TMVP cadres, have still not been released, despite repeated appeals.

 

Intervention of senior Muslim politicians, both local and national, to diffuse the simmering situation, has so far failed to produce any positive results.

 

The TMVP is adamant not to release the two youths from Eravur.

 

TMVP’s refusal to release the abductees has sent a strong message to the rest of the country that, the party is ready to take on the Muslims, who the party suspects to have masterminded the assassination last week of Shanthan - a senior TMVP cadre in Kathankudi, reported The Bottom Line agency.

 

As TMVP cadres continue to go berserk in the Muslim hamlets in the east, threatening and intimidating Muslims, the police failed to bring the TMVP under control, resulting in Muslim youths and militants taking up arms against the TMVP.

 

While the TMVP cadres pose threats to the Muslims, the Muslim militants, on the other hand, have threatened to strike at Tamils living in some of the Muslim villages.

 

This has resulted in more than 400 to 500 Tamil families living in the border villages, fleeing to safer locations.

 

Already some 252 Tamil families have sought refuge at Thannamunai Punitha Valanar Vidyalaya and another 250 families at Mylampaveli Sri Vigneswara School.

 

The Government has, to date, not evolved a mechanism to issue dry rations and other relief to these people.

 

However, the TMVP has initiated a relief programme and begun distributing dry rations to the refugees.

 

Similarly, several hundreds of Muslims are also living in fear for the same reasons.

 

The police, to date, have not made any arrests in connection with the killing of Shanthan and his bodyguard Dharshan on 22 May. A native of Savalakadai in Amparai, Shanthan’s father was killed in a Tamil-Muslim conflict in the early 90s, after which Shanthan joined the Eelam Peoples Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF - Razeek group).

 

Former TMVP leader Karuna Amman appointed him to be in charge of the Ariyampathi division in Batticaloa. Shanthan functioned as the de facto chairman and delivered the goods to the people of the area. Shanthan also took a strong stance against Muslim colonisation within the division, resulting in a feud between him and the Muslim community.

 

Shanthan’s wife later contested the March 10 local polls and became the chairperson of the council, but according to local reports, her husband virtually ran the council. Shanthan was also a trusted lieutenant of the present Eastern Province chief minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan alias Pillaiyan.

 

Local intelligence sources point out that Shanthan’s killing in a predominantly Muslim area has not only led to suspicion, but is construed as a mischievous act aimed at triggering off fresh clashes between the Muslims and the Tamils.

 

A polarisation of the Tamils and the Muslims was widely speculated following the May 10 Eastern Provincial Councils election, as, for the first time, the ruling party fielded two chief ministerial candidates from both the Tamil and Muslim communities.

 

However, as anticipated, the communities, though worked separately to promote their respective candidates, did not enter into any sort of communal clashes.

 

A sudden outbreak of violence in Kathankudi is now viewed as an attempt by a few unknown elements to destabilise the east and portray the TMVP leader Pillaiyan as a weak leader, according to The Bottom Line.

 

It was following the killing of Shanthan and his bodyguard that, the TMVP cadres went berserk, spraying bullets at Muslims in Kathankudi. In this incident, three Muslims were killed, one was hacked to death and a Sinhalese sustained injuries.

 

The police were brought into the scene to bring law and order, to no avail. The Muslim clergy and other leading personalities made several appeals to the police to check on the armed TMVP cadres roaming the streets, but the police had no control.

 

It is at this point that Pillaiyan personally visited the Mosque in Kathankudi after Jumma prayers and assured protection for the Muslims. Pillaiyan’s assurance did not materialise in time to prevent TMVP cadres abducting two Muslim youths from Eravur.

 

The Interfaith Committee in Batticaloa and several other organisations immediately gathered together to diffuse the situation. They held a series of talks with Pillaiyan and his arch rival M.L.A.M. Hizbullah and pleaded with them to immediately bring the raging violence to a halt.

 

Hizbullah and Pillaiyan took personal interest to settle the issue by talking to their respective communities, but failed. Hizbullah even went to the extent of addressing a group of TMVP cadres at the Eravur police station, appealing them to release the abducted youths, to no avail.

 

Frustrated and angered by the delay in releasing the two Muslim youths, the youth in Eravur, defying an order from their elders, organised a hartal. The Mosque Federation made every attempt to convince the youth to abandon the hartal but the youth were already fired up. They demanded the immediate release of the youth or, face the consequences.

 

As civil societies from both communities were now looking for ways and means to quell the increasing tension, two more Muslims were allegedly abducted by the TMVP. However, intervention by civil societies led to the release of the two Muslims. They were handed over to the Eravur police after being beaten and bruised. They were later hospitalised.

 

Questions are raised as to why the police could not bring the situation under control, which has virtually brought a split between the two communities.

 

Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) general secretary and Eastern Provincial Councilor Hasan Ali said he was disappointed that the police had not moved forward to calm the situation but instead, had ignored certain burning issues, thereby, giving a free hand to an armed group to unleash violence against the Muslims.

 

Coming down hard on the police, he said that, under the law of the country, the police had the powers to arrest anyone found in possession of arms, but the police failed to arrest the armed TMVP cadres seen roaming the streets.

 

“The police is harassing us. The Government might suddenly say we are responsible for this situation. This, we predicted even before the election,” he said.

 

National Unity Alliance (NUA) Leader, Housing Minister Mrs. Ferial Ashraff admitted that there was ‘plenty of tension’ in the east and added it was high time that meaningful steps were taken to eradicate this irretrievably.

 

She said that the prevailing situation in the east was much worse than prior to the May 10 election.

 

She said that suspicion between the Muslims and the Tamils has been prevailing for a long time and added that, respective governments had failed to bridge the gap between these two communities.

 

“We are a people who have fighting blood in us and, I actually don’t know why we are fighting and for what. I don’t think anybody is trying to put these communities together. It is a cause of concern,” the Minister expressed.

 

She said the government is duty bound to intervene, to ensure matters do not get any worse. “We must see that violence is not accelerated,” she said.

 

The newly appointed Chief Minister of the Eastern Province has admitted that members of his organisation are responsible for recent kidnappings in Eravur.

 

Speaking to BBC Tamil Service, Chief Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, known as Pillayan, admitted that the person accused of abducting two Muslims in Eravur is a member of the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal (TMVP).

 

"The person who was involved in the abduction has been handed over to police," CM Pillayan told LR Jegatheesan of BBC Tamil Service.

 

TMVP leader Pillayan insisted the accused is "not directly involved in this incident" quoting reports received by Chief Minister's office.

 

“However we will not permit anybody from our organisation to take law into their hands and as such we have handed him over to the police” Chief Minister Pillayan said.

 

Two other Muslims have gone missing in Eravur since 22 May.

 

The Chief Minister said that he has no information about the two missing Muslims but expressed hope that they would be found soon.

 

“So far no confirmed news in this regard has been received” added Chief Minister Pillayan.

 

The National Muslim Council (NMC) in a statement to media said the TMVP should be disarmed to create normalcy in the east.

 

The Sri Lanka government has not been taking any concrete steps to stop killings and abduction of Muslims by the ‘Pillaiyan group’, the NMC accused.

 

"NMC condemns Pillaiyan group for using arms against Muslim people while saying that they have accepted democracy,” they said in a statement.

 

"It is a coward act to abduct three Muslim traders and later kill them in retaliation to the killing of two cadres of the Pillaiyan group in Muslim dominated Kaathankudy Action should be taken immediately to stop another conflict between Tamils and Muslims," NMC statement said.

 

Meanwhile, a woman was shot dead by police on 26 May as police and Sri Lanka Army tried to disperse crowds in Eravur who took to the streets to protest as news spread that another person gone missing.

 

The person had reappeared within hours as his bicycle needed to be repaired but the situation in Eravur remained tense, journalists said.

 

Separately, Pillayan, was elected Chairman of the “Chief Minister’s Forum” on 31 May in Badulla.

 

The forum discusses issues related to devolution of powers to the provinces. Though the system of provincial government came into vogue in 1988 after the Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987, following the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, various provisions have not been fully implemented.

 

Pillayan’s election for a period of four months was being projected in the context of the claims by President Mahinda Rajapaksa regime’s that polls in the east were a ‘triumph of democracy’.

 

The next meeting of the Chief Minister’s Forum is scheduled to be held in Batticaloa.

 

A conference organised by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) earlier this week maintained that despite the misgivings about the 13th Amendment, the original objectives of establishing the Provincial Councils were the resolution of the ethnic conflict and the creation of a provincial-level tier of government to address regional development.

 

“Why did neither of these objectives come to fruition? The consensus among elected members and officials of Provincial Councils is that there are common issues affecting all provinces as well as other issues that pertain uniquely to some provinces,” it said.

The newly appointed Chief Minister of the Eastern Province has admitted that members of his organisation are responsible for recent kidnappings in Eravur.

 

Speaking to BBC Tamil Service, Chief Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, known as Pillayan, admitted that the person accused of abducting two Muslims in Eravur is a member of the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Puligal (TMVP).

 

"The person who was involved in the abduction has been handed over to police," CM Pillayan told LR Jegatheesan of BBC Tamil Service.

 

TMVP leader Pillayan insisted the accused is "not directly involved in this incident" quoting reports received by Chief Minister's office.

 

“However we will not permit anybody from our organisation to take law into their hands and as such we have handed him over to the police” Chief Minister Pillayan said.

 

Two other Muslims have gone missing in Eravur since 22 May.

 

The Chief Minister said that he has no information about the two missing Muslims but expressed hope that they would be found soon.

 

“So far no confirmed news in this regard has been received” added Chief Minister Pillayan.

 

The National Muslim Council (NMC) in a statement to media said the TMVP should be disarmed to create normalcy in the east.

 

The Sri Lanka government has not been taking any concrete steps to stop killings and abduction of Muslims by the ‘Pillaiyan group’, the NMC accused.

 

"NMC condemns Pillaiyan group for using arms against Muslim people while saying that they have accepted democracy,” they said in a statement.

 

"It is a coward act to abduct three Muslim traders and later kill them in retaliation to the killing of two cadres of the Pillaiyan group in Muslim dominated Kaathankudy Action should be taken immediately to stop another conflict between Tamils and Muslims," NMC statement said.

 

Meanwhile, a woman was shot dead by police on 26 May as police and Sri Lanka Army tried to disperse crowds in Eravur who took to the streets to protest as news spread that another person gone missing.

 

The person had reappeared within hours as his bicycle needed to be repaired but the situation in Eravur remained tense, journalists said.

 

Separately, Pillayan, was elected Chairman of the “Chief Minister’s Forum” on 31 May in Badulla.

 

The forum discusses issues related to devolution of powers to the provinces. Though the system of provincial government came into vogue in 1988 after the Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987, following the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, various provisions have not been fully implemented.

 

Pillayan’s election for a period of four months was being projected in the context of the claims by President Mahinda Rajapaksa regime’s that polls in the east were a ‘triumph of democracy’.

 

The next meeting of the Chief Minister’s Forum is scheduled to be held in Batticaloa.

 

A conference organised by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) earlier this week maintained that despite the misgivings about the 13th Amendment, the original objectives of establishing the Provincial Councils were the resolution of the ethnic conflict and the creation of a provincial-level tier of government to address regional development.

 

“Why did neither of these objectives come to fruition? The consensus among elected members and officials of Provincial Councils is that there are common issues affecting all provinces as well as other issues that pertain uniquely to some provinces,” it said.

 

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) fighters belonging to a special marine wing of the Sea Tigers launched a pre-dawn attack against a strategic naval base on an islet off Jaffna peninsula last week killing at least 13 sailors and wounding many more.

 

Six civilians including children were killed when Sri Lankan forces in nearby bases retaliated by launching heavy artillery fire.

 

According to LTTE officials, the raid was launched at 1:25 a.m. on Thursday May 29 and the base was brought under the LTTE control at 2:00 a.m.

 

"At least 13 Sri Lanka navy (SLN) personnel were killed and many sailors wounded in the raid carried out by a special marine wing of the Sea Tigers," LTTE officials added.

 

The Sea Tigers also seized weapons, including a 50-caliber machine gun, a mortar, two Ligh Machine Guns and a radar from the camp on Chiruththeevu islet situated between to Mandaitheevu island and Jaffna city.

 

There were no LTTE casualties in the operation, the officials said adding that the marines safely returned to their base in Vanni mainland after destroying the SLN camp.

 

One 50 caliber machine gun, one radar equipment, one RPD LMG, one AK LMG, one 60 mm mortar, one 40 mm Rocket Launcher, four T-56 type-2 assault rifles were seized by the Sea Tigers.

 

141 shells for 60 mm mortar, 06 rockets for 40 mm Rocket Launcher, 930 rounds for 50 caliber machine gun, 430 linked 50 caliber rounds, an extra barrel for the 50 caliber gun, extra barrel for RPD LMG, 795 rounds for RPD LMG, and 1,380 linked 7.62 mm rounds were among the ammunitions. 10 masks, a solar panel with battery and a binocular were among the accessories seized by the Tigers.

 

Three dead bodies of the Sri Lanka Navy sailors were recovered by the Tigers.

 

The LTTE, on Thursday morning, displayed the weapons and military equipments seized in the attack to media in Vanni.

 

The Tigers also identified one of the SLN sailor killed in action as Ranasingha Aaarachchige Saman Pushpa Kumara from Bangalavaththa with Sri Lankan national identity card number 841912462 V.

 

However, Sri Lanka's defence ministry said army and navy personnel successfully repulsed the rebels, killing at least 16 LTTE cadres and destroying three enemy boats.

 

"Troops have also mounted heavy artillery attacks towards the fleeing terrorists as enemy fatalities were expected to soar," the ministry said.

 

Following the raid Sri Lankan forces retaliated by directing heavy artillery fire towards coastal villages of Jaffna.

 

Six civilians, including children and a couple, were killed and 13 persons were wounded when shells hit the coastal villages Kurunakar, Kozhumpuththu'rai, Paasaiyoor and the areas close to Jaffna Fort, Thuraiappa Stadium and the Sri Lanka Telecommunication building in the early hours of Thursday, following the LTTE raid at Chiruththeevu islet close to Jaffna.

 

Two children, boys of age 14 and 13, and a mother were killed in Paasaiyoor. Father and another brother were wounded.

 

In Kurunakar, Joseph Francis, 54, and his wife Joseph Francis Sagayarani, 53, were killed on the spot when shells hit their house. Their children were wounded in the attack, according to initial reports. Their house was located near Kurunakar water tank.

 

13 civilians have been admitted in Jaffna hospital following the shelling duel.

 

Residents in the coastal areas reported shelling since 2:30 a.m. Thursday.

 

"Recognition of Tamil sovereignty and right to self-determination are key issues in creating a climate for a negotiated settlement," Nadesan added.

 

'Development' has long been used as a camouflage to deprive the Tamils of their homeland and to subordinate the Tamil regions by the Sinhala majoritarian government of Colombo, Mr. Nadesan further said.

 

He also revealed that the Sri Lankan government has not been providing access to the Norwegian facilitators to visit Vanni to meet with the LTTE representatives.

 

Full text of the interview follows:

TamilNet: In a recent interview, the U.S. Ambassador for Sri Lanka has stated that it would be very useful for LTTE leader Pirapaharan to give up the idea of seeking an independent TamilState and agreeing to negotiate with a united Sri Lanka. What is your response?

 

Nadesan: The Tamileelam struggle is not simply a LTTE struggle. It is Tamil people’s legitimate struggle with moral, political and legal reasons. It is a very democratic goal. And the LTTE represents only people’s mandate.

 

As far as the LTTE is concerned, the ultimate aim is what is good for Eezham Tamils who were placed at the receiving end for more than a century and face genocide in Sri Lanka. Experience has made the Eezham Tamils to decide on a separate state and to fight for it. Recognition of Tamil sovereignty and right to self-determination are key issues in creating a climate for a negotiated settlement. As this has been the logical end for situations similar to that of the Tamils, in different parts of the contemporary world, it is a puzzle what makes it different only in the case of the Eezham Tamils.

 

TamilNet: The implementation of the 13th amendment appears to be the basis for political discussions at present. The U.S. Ambassador also has commented on this regard while expressing his opinion that the political solution should go beyond the 13th amendment. How do you look at basing the discussions on the 13th amendment?

 

Nadesan: The Tamils have rejected the 13th amendment long back. In the last 21-years of its introduction, neither Tamils nor Sinhalese have shown any enthusiasm towards the 13th amendment. How can one consider it as a basis for settlement when it has been proven that people have no interest in it?

 

Mahinda regime uses this 13th amendment drama to pursue its war against the Tamil nation while paying lip service to the political solution.

TamilNet: 'Development' appears to be the paradigm associated with the political ongoing, especially in the EasternProvince. What is the position of the LTTE regarding International involvement in this process?

 

Nadesan: 'Development' has long been used as a camouflage to deprive the Tamils of their homeland and to subordinate the Tamil regions by the Sinhala majoritarian government of Colombo.

 

Historically, the so-called 'development schemes' were introduced with an ethnic oppressive agenda of disturbing the geographical contiguity of the Tamil homeland.

 

The coastal routes linking the villages in the Tamil homeland were neglected and instead the infrastructure was designed to link Sinhala areas with Tamil coastal villages. Administrative borders were expanded to include Sinhala areas to systematically alter the demographic proportions. Colonisation schemes were introduced under the pretext of development scheme, evicting Tamils from a large number of villages. Since the independence of Ceylon, there has been a continuous record of the Sri Lankan state systematically applying the 'development-agenda' to serve a 'colonisation-agenda'.

 

The Sinhalese leaders have mastered the art of misleading the donors and the International Community in sustaining their oppressive agenda while diverting the funds to the infrastructure, which has deprived Tamils of their economic opportunities and their very existence in their own villages.

 

Thus, there was no real capital accumulation in the Tamil regions in the past several decades. The capital accumulation was concentrating in Sinhala areas, especially in and around Colombo.

 

The Sri Lankan state is successfully making use of the unitary constitution for this anti-Tamil 'development agenda'.

 

This is why we envisaged extra-constitutional arrangements such as opting for the World Bank to act as a custodian of donor funds to rebuild the Northeast during the negotiations as well as in the Post Tsunami agreement (P-TOMS) signed by the parties.

 

But, again, what happened to SIHRN and, especially to the P-TOMS agreement, which was a purely humanitarian agreement, has been widely witnessed by the International Community.

 

The Sri Lanka government can invoke provisions of the unitary constitution at any time it wishes to nullify development of the Tamils of the North and East.

 

We have witnessed precedence in this regard in the de-merger of the merged North-EastProvince and in nullifying the P-TOMS.

 

Besides the handicapped constitution, large-scale misappropriation of development funds by the government for sustaining the war, and through that sustaining its regime, will never allow any real development.

 

Further, corruption within the ranks and files of the Sri Lankan government is a serious impediment for any development programme. Even Sinhalese who bring to light such malpractices are penalised violently.

 

Therefore, the priority of the International Community should first be placed at finding a political solution, before embarking upon a development-agenda in this Island.

 

Development is possible only when there is permanent peace. For that the International Community should engage seriously in restoring the status quo which it itself has disturbed in recent times and should pressurise the Sri Lankan government to come to terms with a negotiated settlement. This only can pave way for a true development.

 

TamilNet: What is the present status of your dialogue with the Norwegian peace facilitators?

 

Nadesan: We have requested the Royal Norwegian Government to continue the facilitation. It should also be noted that the Co-Chairs, representing the United States, the European Union, Japan, and Norway, have told the Sri Lankan government to provide access to their representatives and the facilitator to visit Vanni and discuss with us. Norwegian Special Envoy and the Norwegian Ambassador to Sri Lanka have expressed their desire to have dialogue. But, the Sri Lankan government has not been providing access to the Norwegian facilitators in an attempt to block our diplomatic dialogue with the facilitator.

 

TamilNet: The LTTE is accused of carrying out attacks on civilian targets in the South. Can you comment?

 

Nadesan: The LTTE categorically denies responsibility for the attacks on civilians in Sri Lanka. We never mean ill-will against the Sinhalese people. Attacks on civilian targets by the Sri Lankan armed forces have become routine occurrences in Vanni. Human Rights violations of civilians such as abductions, disappearances and extra-judicial killings take place throughout the Sri Lanka government controlled territories, every day. Now the Sinhala regime unleashes violence against the Sinhala and Tamil journalists. Many attacks and violations by known perpetrators such as the armed forces have still not been brought to justice. One needs a holistic approach to stop such anti-people activities in Sri Lanka.

In an interview with Sri Lankan state owned newspaper the Sunday Observer, US ambassador for Sri Lanka urged LTTE leader Velupillai Pirapaharan to give up the demand for a separate Tamil state saying the Tamil community wanted a solution to the over two-decade-old ethnic conflict within a "united" Sri Lanka.

 

"...I think it would be very useful for Prabhakaran to give up this idea of seeking an independent Tamil state and agreeing to negotiate with a united Sri Lanka," US ambassador to Sri Lanka Robert Blake said.

 

Blake said from his discussions with Tamil people in Sri Lanka, he thinks "95 per cent of them support a solution within a framework of a united Sri Lanka.

 

"They (the Tamil people) are not seeking an independent Tamil Eelam which Prabhakaran is seeking," Blake told the Sunday Observer Newspaper.

 

Blake said giving up the idea of a separate state, would give Prabhakaran "lots of credibility to respond to lots of skepticism here in the South (Sri Lanka) that the LTTE would never negotiate with the government." The US envoy said Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims have been living together in a peaceful manner in the country.

 

"I always remind people who are visiting from US that Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims lived together and continue to live peacefully together.

 

"Tamils are living in Colombo peacefully with their Sinhalese and Muslim friends. So there is no ethnic conflict here. And certainly the government is defending itself against terrorism," he said.

 

In reply to another question, Blake said US believes that the answer to the conflict lies with a power sharing concept which can respond to the aspirations of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims.

 

The excerpts of the interview published in the Sunday Observer in Sri Lanka follows:

  

Excerpts:

Q: Are you satisfied with the support that the US had offered so far to Sri Lanka and what are the strategic areas where the US and Sri Lanka should work closely?

 

A: Yes. The US and Sri Lanka are close friends for more than 50 years now. The US is a strong supporter of Sri Lanka’s fight against terrorism. We strongly believe that Sri Lanka like all other countries has an obligation to defend its people against LTTE terrorism.

 

The US has provided military, law enforcement and other kinds of support to help the government to defend itself while believing that a purely a military solution would not be the correct solution for this conflict.

 

The US believes that the answer to the conflict lies with a power sharing concept which can respond to the aspirations of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. We also believe that in this very important stage of the conflict, it is very important for the government to address the human rights issues as well.

 

The US also has concerns about Tamils who suffer disproportionately due to human rights violations. It is important to give them a sense of feeling that they could live with respect and dignity here. So improving the human rights performances is also an important aspect of our dialogue with the government.

 

Q: The US supports developing countries. Sri Lanka has been battered and bruised by LTTE terrorism and how best the US could support in curbing terrorism?

 

A: I think I have just answered that question. The US is one of the first countries to declare LTTE as a foreign terrorist organisation in 1997. We have also helped to investigate and prosecute people in the US, who were trying to provide arms to the LTTE.

 

So, the FBI, for an example, has conducted distinct operations that had resulted in the arrest of many people and those investigations are on-going. We also have a central bank, which improves financial investigations to track down the money flow into the LTTE and help to stop those money from flowing in.

 

Then the most importantly we work with our friends in the military to help them to stop import of arms into this country.

 

We gave them a maritime surveillance system last year - a radar system - that will give the Sri Lanka Navy a much better picture of LTTE naval activities in their waters and thereby give them the opportunity to detect LTTE shipments of arms. I must say they have enjoyed considerable success last year in sinking many of these ships.

 

The ban on LTTE is extremely effective in terms of implementing the American law. People understand that we are very strict about forcing our laws which will prosecute anyone who is believed to be illegally assisting the LTTE.

 

Q: Criticism had mounted when the East was about to be liberated. Now the Mahinda Rajapaksa government has created the right environment to give more power to the people whereby they can look after their own affairs. What is your comment on restoring democracy in the East?

 

A: I think President Rajapaksa and the Sri Lankan Government made very important progress over the past year. First they have expelled the LTTE from the East. That is a positive development and secondly they have restored government services.

 

In the East they have reopened schools, hospitals and government institutions. Now there is a greater sense of normalcy in many towns in the East. People are out late at nights, going for movies and for shopping which is a big achievement after 20 years. There is stability now, in that part of the country.

 

With regard to the election we always support the principle of free elections. It is important to allow the local inhabitants to represent their views. There have been some controversies which were highlighted in the media.

 

The Opposition parties have alleged that there were many irregularities. The US is not in a position to judge since we did not have observers on the ground. But we think that it is important for the government and the new Provincial Council to look into those charges seriously and act on them.

 

In the long run it is really important to consider what the people of the East believe. If they believe that it was largely a free and fair election and they support the new council, then the international community should also be prepared to accept their decision in toto.

 

In terms of what happens after, I think that the new Chief Minister has an important challenge on his hand. First of all, he has to assure security, because on one hand he is the chosen Chief Minister of the EasternProvince and on the other hand he is the head of the TMVP which still has armed cadres.

 

So, he is in a difficult position where he has to enforce state law as the Chief Minister and on the other hand a fairly large number of armed cadres. I think something must be done and they can not continue to do illegal activities in the East.

 

Otherwise they would undermine the leadership of Pillaiyan and the transition that the TMVP is trying to make while being a para-military group and a political party. So, we support the idea of them of being a political party. But that transition must be completed and certainly they can not be in both.

 

Beyond the challenge of security, I think that the new Chief Minister in order to secure the support of the people of the East, it is very important to show that he has been given opportunities to serve all other communities in the East and pursuing development in a neutral way.

 

And I think that way he can ensure that there is harmony among these communities and also stability in the East, which will automatically reach to a greater development and priority for the people of the East.

 

Q: Will the US continue with its support to develop the East?

 

A: Yes, we have quite a number of projects with the assistance of the private sector, for example the vocational training. We have just announced a major project in Batticaloa to develop dairy industry and another to grow vegetables for exports.

 

We strongly believe that we need to help the people of the East and give them economic opportunities. We believe that there is a big role for the private sector to play. We have proposed to give more assistance for the East and the US government is considering it now.

 

Q: You have always advocated a credible political package to meet the aspirations of the Tamils. How do you see the APRC proposal to implement the 13th Amendment?

 

A: The East is a fine laboratory to show that powers within the 13th Amendment be devolved within the Eastern Provincial Council. But I think the government needs to go beyond the 13th Amendment. Implementing the 13th amendment is itself will satisfy the aspirations of the Tamils.

 

The way they develop must be a significant power sharing proposals through the APRC using some other mechanisms. But I do believe that the APRC has made lots of progress.

 

According to Prof. Vitharana over 90 percent of their work has been done and I think the APRC has been a useful mechanism to get the Southern consensus to move forward. The most important thing is to come up with an idea which is really welcomed by the Tamils.

 

I think that it is important for the government to consult a wide range of Tamils. We are not calling for negotiations with the LTTE. That is something that the government has to decide.

 

It is important to recognize more than half of the Tamils are living outside the Wanni. I think their interests also should be respected as well. So, people like Anandasngaree and other elected representatives in the government controlled areas are needed to be brought into this process and consulted.

 

Q: You mentioned the solution should be something beyond the 13th Amendment. So what is your proposal to end the national issue?

 

A: I think we need to distinguish as these are two different things. The President Rajapaksa’s proposal to implement the 13th Amendment is a good idea. But I don’t really want to come up with a proposal because whenever I try to say something I am later accused of trying to dictate to the Sri Lankan people. The US does not have any intention of doing that. It is up to the Sri Lankan people to decide what is best for them.

 

Q: What do you think that Sri Lanka is facing today - is it a war on terror or an ethnic problem? What sort of a solution do you suggest to end the conflict in the island?

 

A: I think all these are loaded terms. I am reluctant to say this is an ethnic conflict but it is a civil conflict. I always remind people who are visiting from USA that Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims lived together and continue to live peacefully together. Tamils are living in Colombo peacefully with their Sinhalese and Muslim friends. So there is no ethnic conflict here. And certainly the government is defending itself against terrorism.

 

Q: It is clearly proven that the LTTE is not the sole representative of the Tamils. And also it has been proved the LTTE’s political agenda is different from the Tamils. What do you have to say?

 

A: I do actually see there are important differences here. From my discussions with Tamils I know that over 95 percent of them support a solution within a framework of a united Sri Lanka.

 

They are not seeking an independent Tamil Eelam which Prabhakaran is seeking. I think it would be very useful for Prabhakaran to give up this idea of seeking an independent TamilState and agreeing to negotiate with a united Sri Lanka.

 

I think this would give him lots of credibility to respond to lots of scepticism here in the South that the LTTE would never negotiate with the government. The LTTE has a responsibility to show that they are prepared to negotiate in a genuine way.

 

Q: What is your view about the on-going military operations to liberate Wanni where people are living under severe hardship and the young and the old were being conscripted by the LTTE?

 

A: With respect to the on-going military campaign, as I said earlier, the US do not believe in purely a military solution is possible. The 25-years long experience of war here has shown that the LTTE is a rather formidable organisation and it is very difficult to defeat them militarily.

 

So the best way to reach a solution is through a political solution to address the aspirations of the Tamils and all the communities. And again the Tamils in Wanni and rest of the country need sense of dignity and conviction in future that they will be able to have an important say over matters that concern them especially the areas where they are predominant.

 

They should be able to have a high degree of self governance within a united Sri Lanka. I believe that is really a way forward to achieve a peaceful settlement to this conflict.

 

Q: You have just mentioned that the military can not defeat LTTE and this was the assumption before the East was liberated by the military. So how can you say that the military cannot defeat the LTTE in North?

 

A: The East was a different situation and the LTTE was spread out. But Wanni is more in the heartland of the LTTE. Here they have been prepared for many years to face any kind of an attack.

 

Q: Do you still believe that Sri Lankan Security Forces cannot capture Prabhakaran?

 

A: I think you have to ask this question from the Forces. What I can say is that the US does not have any love for Prabhakaran. But it is going to be difficult for the government to get him.

 

Q: He is the ‘Most wanted man’ by the Indian government for the killing of the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. In which way could the US help the government to bring him to book?

 

A: I can not really say how, as we are not involved in any military efforts to capture him. We believe that the best way would be, not with the gun but through peaceful means.

 

Q: Do you think that both Al-Qaeda and the LTTE, are ruthless terrorist organizations and how do you categorise the LTTE?

 

A: I would not say they are the same at all. I do not want to get into the business of comparing terrorist organisations because every terrorist organization is different. And it is also important to address the LTTE in the Sri Lankan context.

 

Q: But some countries call the LTTE as freedom fighters?

 

A: I do not respect the freedom fighter argument. Certainly any group which is working for freedom, they should do it in a peaceful manner. They can not use violence and terror. That is same with the LTTE and we have consistently said they must renounce terrorism and stop using violence.

 

Q: The US and Sri Lanka are engaged in a common fight - combatting terrorism. But some critics say that the US has double standards when combatting terrorism against the US and dealing with the terrorism in countries like Sri Lanka. What is your comment?

 

 

A: I really don’t agree with that. I think we have a very consistent approach and even in places like Iraq where we are confronted with a very serious terrorist problem and we are in favour of a political solution there. The insurgency strategy of the US is based on using a wide range of tools to combat terrorism and it is just not the military strategy.

 

In Iraq we are engaged in with certain strategies to bring down the levels of killing and violence both against American forces and other coalition forces. The ordinary Iraqis have come way down over the last years. Iraq is a major domestic issue an year ago in my country and now people have confidence that Iraqis are in a better track and hopeful about their future.

 

So the policies are the same that we are advocating here in Sri Lanka and so I can say there would not be any double standards.

 

Q: In this situation what are the priorities of a country - combatting terror to save lives or safeguarding human rights?

 

A: Well. I do not think there is contradiction between the two. I think one has to devote. Clearly one has to defend one’s country against terrorism. That is extremely important. For any government the most important priority is to defend its citizens. It is true in the US and it is true in Sri Lanka and every other country in the world. But we also believe that it is possible to preserve human rights.

 

So, for example, one of the very difficult problems the government faces is to identify suicide bombers. How they find these people before they carry out their murderous acts. And I believe that the way to do that is still to arrest, question in a humane way and if they are suspected of the crime produce them in courts.

 

But do not use extra judicial killings and other kind of things. And those acts will undermine the long term solutions. So, it is much better to use rule of law to address terrorism. Accountability of rule of law is extremely important.

 

Q: Do you think that Sri Lanka has violated UN Conventions when strengthening bi-lateral relations with Iran?

 

A: I do not think so and not to my knowledge. But is up to the government to be aware of those resolutions.

 

Q:Iran is in rivalry with the US with regard to nuclear issues. Therefore how do you see the recent visit of the Iranian President to Sri Lanka?

 

A: Our concerns about Iran is well-known. President - Bush, Secretary of State - Rice and many our leaders are concerned about their nuclear capabilities. We acknowledge their right to develop civil nuclear energy for energy purposes. But the US opposes nuclear weapons. Similarly we have expressed our deep concern about the Iranian support for international terrorism particulary in the Middle East, especially the support for groups like Hisbulla.

 

We always want all our friends to make the same point for Iran. At the same time we understand that Sri Lanka has to develop relationships with Iran and we do not have objections if they donate funds education projects in the South.

 

Q: We were made to understand that you had met the members of the Commission of Inquiry which probes into 15 cases of killings of Aid workers and other alleged HR cases? What was your area of interest while meeting the commissioners?

 

A: Yes, we did have a short meeting with them, and the purpose of the meeting as Justice Udalagama has explained was purely a technical matter. The Commission did not get the support of the IIEGPS and the Commission has the problem of how to continue the video conferencing to record testimony of witnesses resident abroad. So the question arose as to whether the international community could continue to fund the video conferencing.

 

Since the US and the other partners in the IIEGP process happened to fund the process all along, we discussed the matter whether to fund the particular video conferencing. So that was real the purpose of the meeting.

 

The US do not have any intension of whatsoever in interfering anyway with the Commission of Inquiry. We strongly believe in independence. I really do not share the allegations that we are interfering with the Commission and we simply looked into logistic matters.

 

We support the Commission appointed by the President. And he has reiterated on many occasions that his commitment in seeing this commission achieve its desired task. So we totally support the President in this regard.

 

Is Sri Lanka's bloody ethnic conflict and dismal human rights record an issue for international corporations and multinationals doing business in the country? Business leaders and rights activists are divided on this.

 

The economy, despite the conflict, is recording an average growth of over five percent per annum. Last year it was 6.2 percent, a figure which the World Bank commended last week. In fact, the Bank is putting together a higher four-year funding programme totalling 900 million dollars starting from June 2008, up from around 700 million dollars in the previous 2005-2008 Country Assistance Strategy (CAS). The Bank’s board is meeting on Jun. 5 to approve the new CAS.

 

"Yes, certainly people are concerned about the violence in Sri Lanka and the human rights situation, and big corporations are not investing. But Sri Lanka has a small domestic market for them to invest in and their concentration currently is on the global crisis of high food and fuel prices, which is seen touching 150 dollars per barrel in coming months," said Mahendra Amarasuriya, a local business leader who is currently chairman of Lions International, the global charity driven by big business.

 

Amarasuriya, who heads Sri Lanka's most profitable private bank, Commercial Bank, says that despite concerns Sri Lanka continues to draw investments from Asian Tigers like Malaysia and Korea. Malaysia was Sri Lanka's biggest foreign investor in 2007, the third year running, ousting countries like Britain and Japan. Neighbouring India is also a major investor in Sri Lanka.

 

Human rights activists see different. They point to the country’s inability to retain its seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, at last week's poll, as a negative trend that could affect trade and one that is likely to affect Sri Lanka's chances of continuing to benefit from European duty free concessions.

 

Sri Lanka is the only South Asian nation to enjoy generalised system of preferences (GSP+) duty free trade concessions from the European Community. The three-year scheme that covers 7,200 items, including garments, ends in December 2008 and is up for renewal.

 

The EC says retaining GSP+ depends on how well the Sri Lankan government is seen implementing 27 international conventions on human rights, labour rights and environmental standards.

 

But Julian Wilson, EU ambassador in Colombo, has criticised newspaper reports on the continuation of GSP+ being linked to human rights abuses as 'rubbish'. The ‘Daily Mirror’ newspaper recently quoted him as saying at a function on the issue of GSP+ that "I will only say that a lot of melodramatic rubbish has been written about the renewal of GSP+ in the local press. The truth is simple if somewhat banal--the EU wants Sri Lanka to receive GSP+ again for the coming three years," he said.

 

Yet respected activists like Jehan Perera, director at the local National Peace Council, says despite these public statements the EU is ‘’very, very’’ concerned about the human rights situation and has privately expressed this.

 

"There is a great deal of disappointment being expressed over the lack of implementation of the conventions. EU officials say Sri Lanka has all the institutions in place but no political will to implement them (conventions)," said.

 

Perera says Sri Lanka's loss at the U.N. Human Rights Council vote will give added strength to the EU to hold the government accountable for the growing number of human rights abuses when Sri Lanka's application for a continuation of the trade concessions is made this year. Garments, Sri Lanka's biggest commodity export, are the biggest beneficiary of the concessions. The industry, workers and trade unions fear up to 200,000 workers and their dependants would be affected if these concessions are lost.

 

Sri Lanka's human rights record is appalling, with intimidation of the media being amongst the worst forms of abuse. Last week, Keith Noyahr, defence columnist and associate editor of the English-language ‘Nation’ newspaper, a weekly, was abducted by an unidentified group near his Colombo home and brutally assaulted.

 

Newspapers, rights groups and colleagues of Noyahr had recently criticised the army commander in a column and that may have been the provocation of the assault, the latest in a string of attacks on the media. Another journalist, Jayaprakash Sittampalam Tissainayagam, has been held in custody at a military detention centre in Colombo since Mar. 7 without being charged.

 

Authorities say the journalist, who runs a media website and is a former IPS writer, is being held on suspicion of involvement with Tamil separatist militants.

 

Amnesty International says at least 10 media workers have been unlawfully killed in Sri Lanka since the beginning of 2006, while others have been arbitrarily detained, tortured and allegedly disappeared while in the custody of security forces.

 

According to New York-based Human Rights Watch, at least 1,500 people have "disappeared" between 2006 and 2007. Most were minority Tamils living in the conflict-ridden north and east where Tamil Tigers are battling government troops in a campaign to seek equal rights for the minority Tamil community. Right groups say the situation has worsened after a five-year-old ceasefire between the Tamil Tigers and the government collapsed last year.

 

Last week, six candidates competed for Asian seats on the 47-member U.N. Human Rights council. Japan secured 155 votes, South Korea 139, Pakistan 114, and Bahrain 142 while Sri Lanka lost its seat, securing only 101 votes.

 

A massive campaign mounted by the Sri Lankan government met ran into an equally imposing counter-campaign by international human rights groups to dissuade countries from voting for Sri Lanka. "The Human Rights Council vote should be a wakeup call for the Sri Lankan government," Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, was quoted as saying in a press release.

 

"We are in serious danger of losing the EU GSP+," says Anton Marcus, general secretary of the Free Trade Zones and General Services Employees Union, which, together with garment manufacturers, are trying to persuade the government to implement U.N. conventions on associations for workers and collective bargaining.

 

But despite such concerns, institutions like the Bank and the Asian Development Bank (AsDB) continue to provide assistance to Sri Lanka and increase the quantum of aid.

 

Last month, AsDB said it was releasing a 300 million dollar loan to Sri Lanka for a port project, approved as far back as February 2007. AsDB officials said the delay was owing to concerns over governance and tender procedures which have now been sorted out. WB South Asia vice-president Praful Patel told reporters on Friday in Colombo that Sri Lanka has made a request for emergency food aid from the Bank-led Global Food Crisis Response Fund to tackle the food crisis sweeping the world.

 

He said Sri Lanka would be in line to receive up to 100 million dollars from this fund, and in the course of his briefing praised government efforts to reduce poverty rates by seven percent to 15.2 percent of the population in 2006-2007.

 

Peace activist Perera agrees that there are countries and institutions that still support Sri Lanka financially despite the record of human rights abuses. He says the U.S. and Europe have reduced funding because Sri Lanka is a middle-income country and there is more focus is on Africa. "Yet if there is peace the doors would open for more funding,’’ said Perera – aview shared by the Bank’s s Patel. "There is a lot more donors can do (in development funding) if there is peace and the space opens on the political economy side," Patel says.

 

Perera says it is difficult to measure human rights abuses and the level of impunity. "It's not like any science. How do you measure rights and freedom? For example, at the recent eastern provincial elections, there were fewer killings than at previous polls but the level of intimidation of voters was the worst on record."

 

Last year, the Sri Lankan military had wrested the eastern province from the grip of Tamil militants after abrogating a Norwegian-brokered peace accord.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Genocide is the systematic attempt to annihilate a racial group or nation. Closely linked is politicide: the annihilation of a group with a given political belief: such as the Tamil belief in a separate state of Eelam.

 

In the UN definition, acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group constitute ‘genocide’. These acts include (1) killing members of the group (2) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group   (3) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

 

‘Politicide’ covers groups that share a political belief (such as Eelam) but not a distinct ethnic identity.

 

The Tamils, a distinct ethnic group with a contiguous millennia-old history, allege genocide. But genocide may pretend to be politicide, a “lesser” crime, not covered by the UN.

 

Social scientists have developed a general theory of genocide by identifying the central elements in a ‘genocidal conjuncture’ – almost like trying to define a mathematical equation. One objective of this effort is to predict or prevent future genocides. 

As Dr. Helen Fein explains: “Genocide is viewed theoretically... as a strategy that ruling elites use to resolve real solidarity and legitimacy conflicts or challenges to their interests against victims decreed outside their universe of obligation in situations in which a crisis or opportunity is caused by or blamed on the victim (or victim impedes taking advantage of an opportunity) and the perpetrators believe that they can get away with it”

 

But even in this narrow theoretical approach, Sri Lanka’s treatment of its Tamil community constitutes genocide.

 

Firstly, the politics of race have dominated Sri Lankan elections since independence; governments that have come to power are invariably those that have espoused the anti-Tamil card.

 

The organised Buddhist clergy are a “ruling elite”: They have modernised but retained their historical role as “king makers and advisors” in the ancient Sinhalese kingdoms.

 

This militant clergy helped formulate the supremacist policies from the stripping of citizenship of 1 million minority Tamils in 1949, the Sinhala Only Act in 1956, and, from the background of politics, to the ‘Mahinda Chintana’ (‘Mahinda’s Way’) of today.

 

In this way they sealed the Sinhala-Buddhist hold on power. The citizenship act of 1949 neutralised Tamil political power in parliament by reducing the numbers of Tamils eligible to vote by a full 33%. The Sinhala Only Act ensured that by the 1970s, Tamils there were very few Tamils in government, especially the civil service and administrative ranks that provided the infrastructure of a state. Tamils, like the Tutsi in Rwanda, had been the majority of government civil servants before the Act.

 

By a process of recruiting Sinhalese only since 1962, Dr. Brian Blodget describes how the Sri Lankan military was also rendered ethnically pure.

 

And so an ethnically pure ruling elite increased its power base by cleansing lower level government ranks and the military of those who might oppose it in coming years.

 

Sri Lanka’s political parties are dynastic as are the ruling elites. They include firstly, the Bandaranaike Family that first swept to power on the race card of the “Sinhala Only Act”. Secondly the Uncle-Nephew couple of the late Junius Jayawardene and Ranil Wickeremesinghe that dominated the oppostion UNP party. Jayawardene proved his race credentials by presiding over the largest anti-Tamil race pogrom, Black July, in 1983. Thirdly, the three brothers of the Rajapakse family who now dominate the SLFP-led far right alliance which is the UPFA.

 

All these families are, of course, Sinhalese-Buddhist.

 

Because the ruling elites came to power through a racist electoral strategy, the Tamils are “victims decreed outside their universe of obligation” to use Helen Fein’s words. Precisely because these governments are obligated to an entirely different group: the majoritarian Sinhala-Buddhist electorate which brought them to power.

 

Much of the behaviour and attitudes of the Sinhala ruling elites, including the present day Rajapakse family, towards the Tamils is incomprehensible outside of genocide theory.

 

For example, it is only in this framework of genocide theory that we can begin to make sense of President Jayawardene’s radio broadcast during the July 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom, which saw the gruesome mass murder of thousands of Tamils.

 

As Tamil families were being hacked to death or burnt alive on the streets, in their homes, their workplaces and temples, President Jayawardene came on radio for the first time on the 28th July to give his now infamous broadcast.

 

Instead of either apologising or promising protection to the Tamil people during the pogrom, he chose instead to talk about the “suspicion between the Sinhala and the Tamil people” which, he said, began in 1956 and to blame the pogroms on the desire of the Tamil people for separation which he said began in 1976.

 

He concluded his broadcast by promising to the (Sinhala-Buddhist) nation that “We will also see that those ... who advocate the separation of the country lose their civic rights and cannot hold office, cannot practice professions, cannot join movements or organisations in this country. We are very sorry that this step should be taken. But I cannot see, and my Government cannot see, any other way by which we can appease the natural desire and request of the Sinhala people to prevent the country being divided, and to see that those who speak for division are not able to do so legally.”

 

President Jayawardene’s speech makes no rational sense outside of genocide theory. But within the framework above as articulated by Helen Fein it makes perfect sense.

 

The victims, the Tamil people, had well prior to 1983 been decreed “outside the universe of obligation” of the President; hence there was no need to apologise or offer protection.

 

The President was a member of the ruling elite. The genocidal anti Tamil pogrom of 1983 was the strategy this elite used to “resolve real solidarity and legitimacy conflicts or challenges to their interests against victims” to use Ms Fein’s words.

 

There had always been legitimacy issues in Sri Lanka, a country formed by Colonial powers by artificially uniting different historical Tamil and Sinhala governances. After the British left, the exclusion of Tamils via racist legislation exacerbated the government’s crisis of legitimacy.

 

It is now widely accepted that the 1983 pogrom was state orchestrated and government ministers were complicit; for example, the mobs had been provided with electoral registers to help identify Tamils and the ruling party’s officials and their affiliates owned many of the vehicles used to transport the mobs (the military provided the rest).

 

Another Presidential speech two weeks prior to 23 July 1983 had paved the way for the pogrom: “I have tried to be effective for sometime but cannot. I am not worried about the opinion of the Jaffna (Tamil) people now… Now, we cannot think of them. Not about their lives or of their opinion about us... The more you put pressure in the north, the happier the Sinhala people will be here... really, if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala people will be happy."

 

Again, outside of the theory in which the victims were decreed “outside the universe of obligation” of the President, this statement that “if I starve the Tamils out the Sinhala people will be happy” makes no sense.

 

The pogrom was an example where “a crisis or opportunity is caused by or blamed on the victim and the perpetrators believe that they can get away with it”.

 

In any other context, it would be astonishing that the President could try to put the blame for mass murder of the Tamils on the victims themselves. And that he could conceivably mention the year 1956 as the beginning of “distrust” that led to this slaughter.

 

Because 1956 was the year of the “Sinhala Only Act” - legislation designed to ensure that Tamils did not hold government office or jobs of any note, unless they passed the significant hurdle of fluency in Sinhalese.

 

As with the 1949 citizenship act that former U.S. Attorney General Bruce Fein, has compared to Hitler’s Nuremberg laws (1935), the intent of this legislation was to exclude the Tamil minority from participation in important areas of society: the civil service, the military, and jobs in state-owned industries, which in Sri Lanka would even include most of the media.

 

As James Smith said “Genocide is not extreme war or conflict; it is extreme exclusion. Exclusion may start with name-calling, but may end with a group of people being excluded from a society to the point where they are destroyed”

 

But given that genocide necessarily means the victim must be blamed the President’s broadcast during the pogrom makes perfect sense.

 

While the 1983 pogrom led to some immediate international protest, there was no recognition of genocide outside of a few expert academic circles and no economic or political sanctions nor physical intervention.

 

Further, even though the pogrom erupted on the 23rd July, there had been warning signs throughout the preceding few months. Violence by the armed forces against Tamil civilians in Trincomalee had continued through June, prompting a leading Tamil political party to send telegrams to the embassies of western countries in Colombo.

 

The telegram, published in the press on July 1, said: "Tamils experience a pathetic situation in Trincomalee. Killing, looting, arson now taking place under government declared curfew. Racist security forces behind violence. We seek immediate intervention of friendly nations to stop genocide of Tamils".

 

As with Rwanda, over a decade later, the international community was warned of the genocidal pogrom, but chose to ignore it.

 

Twenty-five years later, nothing has changed. Outside a few expert academic circles, there is little international recognition of the genocide of the Tamils. And certainly neither sanctions nor redress against the perpetrating government

 

This is a direct result of a blind spot in liberal genocide theory.

 

For the predominantly North American community of genocide theorists finds it difficult to accept that democratic states are perpetrators of genocide. Sri Lanka after all is not totalitarian.

 

Stephen Chalk, a leading genocide scholar, exemplifies this blind spot “we must never forget that the great genocides of the past have been committed by [state] perpetrators who acted in the name of absolutist or utopian ideologies”. He wrote this prior to Rwanda in 1995, of course.

 

Australian scholar, Dr. Dirk Moses, explains this blind spot in his paper “Toward a theory of critical genocide studies”: “In its initial incarnation, then, genocide studies was really a version of totalitarianism theory because by definition a genocide—at least a true one—can only be committed by a totalitarian or at least authoritarian state.”

 

Moses calls this attitude “ a conceptual blockage” arising from the cold war background in which many of these studies took place.

 

The 1983 Sri Lankan genocide took place in the context of major economic reforms initiated by President Jayawardene, a champion of market capitalism. Shortly afterwards, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, a fan of Jayawardene’s liberal economic policies hailed Sri Lanka as “a five star democracy”.

 

Dirk Moses explains that (according to theorists with the blind spot), “genocides occur in societies—“failed states,”—that have experienced perverted modernizations. Had they followed the western, preferably the North American, road to modernity, it is implied, they would not have become totalitarian states and perpetrated genocide on their own or neighboring populations.”

 

But genocide does take place in democracies. As later studies, following the Rwandan crisis, have begun to recognise: Rwanda was a democracy.

 

If we accept James Smith’s definition of genocide as extreme exclusion, to the point where a group of people is destroyed, then that extreme exclusion began with legislation that the Sinhala people enthusiastically voted for - democratically.

 

The UNP government of Jayawardene that presided over 1983 was chosen democratically and remained in power for decades afterwards: the UNP despite its culpability in the pogrom is the second largest political party in Sri Lanka today.

 

Sri Lanka, as a “model” democracy, has been able to deny genocide both in 1983 and to the present day.

 

It took 21 years and the potential benefits of a peace process with the LTTE, before Chandrika Kumaratunge, leader of the (equally racist) opposition SLFP party and a member of the Bandaranaike dynasty, apologised to the Tamil victims of 1983. A mere 937 victims were offered a derisory 600 pounds, after 21 years of inflation-adjustment.

 

Jayawardene’s own party, the UNP, never apologised for its role in the state sponsored pogrom. Neither were party members involved in the pogrom investigated or disciplined.

 

Despite Jayawardene’s personal culpability in the ethnic pogrom, following dynastic tradition, it was his nephew Ranil Wickremasinghe who took over leadership of the party after his uncle’s death.

 

Notably, Wickremasinghe has been described by Rajiva Wijesinha (former Secretary-General Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process) as the “last significant politician left who contributed to the excesses of J R Jayewardene’s years in power.”

And in 2005, in an astonishing display of denial, Wickremasinghe and his UNP party sought the Tamil vote in Presidential elections: in fact they felt entitled to it.

 

Gregory Stanton of “Genocide Watch” defines the eight stages of genocide: “Denial is the eighth stage that always follows a genocide. It is among the surest indicators of further genocidal massacres. The perpetrators of genocide … deny that they committed any crimes, and often blame what happened on the victims.”

 

Denial of genocide in Sri Lanka is closely linked with politicide.

 

Jayawardene’s immediate reaction to the 1983 pogrom was to criminalize any attempt to seek the most attractive political remedy to the genocide: separation. And this criminalisation means today, that Tamils are arrested, tortured and killed for their aspiration to a free Tamil Eelam, which they see as the solution to the genocide.

 

But Jayawardene was acting according to his democratic mandate. Opposition to Eelam is the litmus test of the state of denial and refusal to accept responsibility of the Sinhala population - a truly remorseful Sinhala population would not oppose a demand that arose legitimately from the genocide.

 

Denial bodes ill for Sri Lanka. Helen Fein notes in her paper “Accounting for genocide after 1945: Theories and some findings” that most users of genocide are repeat offenders.”

 

The genocide framework explains why Western human rights officials are unable to make any headway with Sri Lanka. The UN rapporteurs, UN High Commissioner, Louise Arbour, the eminent people of the IIEGP, all start with the premise that the government is accountable or has obligations to the Tamil people.

 

They are working to a fundamentally flawed paradigm.

 

For in the genocide framework, the Tamil people are outside the “universe of obligation” of the ruling elite. Hence they may be arrested and deported en masse from the capital, they may be arbitrarily executed by troops as were the 17 ACF aid workers, they may be disappeared, tortured, raped and so on.

 

The International diplomatic community has wholly misread the Sinhala ruling elite’s “universe of obligation”. It thinks this universe somehow includes the Tamils when all the evidence points otherwise. So it continues to work on the flawed paradigm of “better implementation” of the ruling elites obligations to the people. And has got absolutely nowhere.

 

But academic genocide theory has begun to catch up with Sri Lanka.

 

In 2008, genocide intervention network lists Sri Lanka as one of eight areas of concern – along with Darfur, Iraq and Congo. Genocide watch lists Sri Lanka as a country in stage 7 – the stage of mass killings.

 

But for the Tamil people, the challenge at hand is not just the recognition of genocide but even after the recognition, whether international assistance will be either likely or timely or competent. History tells us the answer is “No”.

 

As Sri Lanka's military struggles to make progress against the Liberation Tigers' determined resistance in the island's north, and the Mahinda Rajapakse government's frantic efforts to defeat the LTTE shreds the already frayed social, economic and political fabric of the island, international disquiet is mounting. It is against the now apparent inevitability of a protracted, bloody and utterly destructive war - despite the best will of the international community, the destruction will not remain confined to the northern battlefields - that international calls for negotiations have reemerged. However, despite murmurings of there not being any military solution to the conflict, the core of present international policy in Sri Lanka turns on precisely that: the military crippling, if not destruction of the LTTE. It is on this basis that the international community first armed and prepared the Sri Lanka armed forces during the Norwegian peace process and, secondly, then pointedly stood aside as Colombo went to war, inflicting widespread suffering on the Tamils.

 

In an interview with the state-owned Sunday Observer newspaper two weeks ago, the United States' Ambassador to Sri Lanka, Mr. Robert O' Blake, gave voice to the international community's anxieties. "We do not believe," he regretted, "a military solution is going to be possible." 25 years of experience has shown that the LTTE is a rather formidable organization, and it will be very difficult to defeat them militarily, he conceded. Therefore, Mr. Blake said, "the way to reach a solution to the conflict is through a political solution." In short, it is only because the Tamil struggle is so difficult to put down militarily that there must be a 'solution'.

 

To the US and likeminded members of the international community, the problem in Sri Lanka is simply the LTTE i.e. 'terrorism'. There is, despite sixty years of easily accessible history, including three decades of militarised brutality, no acknowledgement of the oppression by the Sinhala state - with which, as Mr. Blake proudly says, the US "has been close friends for more than 50 years now." So much for defending freedom. For the international community, the Sri Lankan state, which they are unashamedly ready and eager to do business with, is in no way racist. It's just bad at governing. This is why Mr. Blake won't make clear why he thinks the Tamils "suffer disproportionately from human rights violations," or why they don't have "a sense of respect and dignity" in Sri Lanka. Consequently, it is not at all clear why he feels the Tamils "should be able to have a very high degree of self-governance within a united Sri Lanka" - and why they don't have any of this, even after sixty years of ethnic strife.

 

The contradictions in Mr. Blake's statements are reflective of international hypocrisy vis-à-vis the oppression of the Tamils. Despite the solemn moralising on human rights, on ‘grievances’, on dignity and so on, the international community in fact has very little commitment to these things. In short, if the Tamils can be militarily disciplined and their demands silenced, then that'll do just fine; international interests can proceed undisturbed.

 

A little reflection on recent history is in order to put things in perspective. To begin with, the US-led international community approached the Norwegian peace process with cynicism and insincerity. Rather than seizing the moment and making the restoration of the Tamils' dignity and self-rule their focus, the international community made the weakening and marginalizing of the LTTE their preoccupation. Why is why, despite everyone agreeing it was a military 'stalemate' that forced negotiations, the US took the lead in rearming and reconstituting the Sri Lankan military. According to Brian Blodgett, an American military scholar, within the first year of the talks, 2002, the Navy and Air Force doubled in size, the Army's artillery firepower was doubled and tank strength tripled. Mr. Blake's predecessor, Jeffrey Lunstead, boasted of this as the US's contribution to peace.

 

Quite apart from this, whilst maintaining the suffering of the Tamils in the Northeast, the international community worked to restore the war-damaged economy and strengthened Colombo's hand as much as possible. In short, the international community made it possible for the Sri Lankan state to confidently resume its war against the Tamil rebellion to Sinhala rule. And before Colombo resumed its onslaught, the international community moved to hamper the LTTE's ability to resist: this is essentially what the bans by the EU and Canada were about. As any fool knows, without the LTTE, there is no question of the Sinhala state making any 'concessions' to the Tamils. So much for 'a very high degree of self-governance', let alone 'a sense of respect and dignity.'

 

The problem, as is also blatantly clear, is Colombo still can't do it. Despite being given as much firepower as it can deploy, unlimited logistical support and, above all, the political space to inflict the suffering and terror necessary to compel the Tamils to give up their demands, the Sinhala state has failed to crush the Tamil rebellion. Of course, the military question is still unresolved and there is still hope in Colombo and in many other capitals of the world that the Sinhalese can do their part, but there is no longer the confidence that engendered the arrogance with which Tamil suffering has been repeatedly dismissed over the past two years. By giving Sri Lanka the means and, thereby, the encouragement to smash the Tamil struggle - and its demands for justice - militarily, the international community is responsible for the unfolding catastrophe.

 

However, even when it comes to seeking a negotiated solution to Sri Lanka's crisis, the international community prefers to somehow make the LTTE the problem. Mr. Blake wants the LTTE to give up its demand for Tamil Eelam and accept a united Sri Lanka - as if it is the Tamils' demand for independence which is the fundamental problem, rather than the racism of the Sri Lankan state which has, over sixty years, pursued a project of Sinhala supremacy in constitutional and military terms.

 

Thus, not only is the international community not committed to a negotiated solution in principle, it is also not committed to defending the Tamils' rights vis-à-vis state oppression or racism. Indeed, it was Ambassador Lunstead's predecessor, Mr. Ashley Wills, who grandly suggested in 2003, during the peace process, that it was time for the LTTE to disarm because "now that the world is paying attention to Sri Lanka as never before, the international community will be watching closely to see that no one's rights gets abused systematically." Well, history - and that includes the track record of the international community as well as the Sri Lankan state - have revealed the hollowness of such external assurances.

 

The point is this: as much as the Tamils may want it, genuine prospects for a lasting negotiated peace in Sri Lanka are nowhere in sight, irrespective of the noises international actors make. They will only improve when the Sri Lankan state's sword is blunted in the battlefields of the north and it turns - as in 2001- to the international community to rescue it from a predicament of its own making. Even, then, rather than assurances, it is only when the international community takes concrete steps to discipline the Sri Lankan state that the Tamils can take international claims of wanting peace seriously. At present, whilst an imposed solution is in the interests of everyone except the Tamils, a just solution is, conversely, only in the interests of the Tamils.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The remains of Brigadier Balaraj, a senior commander Liberation Tigers, who passed away due to a sudden heart attack on 20 May 2008, was laid to rest 6.30 pm on Friday, 23 May, with full military honours in Mulliyavalai Heroes Cemetery the presence of thousands of public and hundreds of LTTE cadres.

 

After the homage ceremony held Thursday in Kilinochchi, the casket containing the remains of Brigadier Balraj was kept at Puthukkudiyiruppu Central College from 8:00a.m till 11:00a.m to enable the public to pay their last respects.

 

After an eulogy by Poddu Ammaan, head of the LTTE Intelligence Wing, the casket preceded by percussion band and accompanied by thousands of people was taken in procession to the church of Infant Jesus in Mullaiththeevu. The cortege arrived at the church around 12:30 p.m.

 

Poorani, head of LTTE Naval wing’s women’s division, lit the common flame at the event held in the main hall of Millaiththeevu Maha Vidyalyam to pay homage to Brigadier Balraj.

 

Vinayagam, deputy commander of the Sea Tigers, presided the event.

 

After that Chandrasegaram and Gnanasekaram, siblings of late Brigadier Balraj, lit the flame of sacrifice, and garlanded the remains.

 

Colonel Soosai, special commander of Sea Tigers garlanded the remains of Brigadier Balraj and paid special tribute to Brigadier Balraj.

 

Thousands of people gathered in the school premises paid their last respects at the event which continued till 2:10 p.m.

 

The casket was then taken in procession from Mulliyavalai junction to Mulliyavalai Vidyananda College where another event to pay homage to Brigadier Balraj was held at 4:00p.m presided by Umainesan, political head of Mulliyavalai zone.

 

A number of LTTE representatives including head of the LTTE political wing B. Nadesan, commander of the Northern Front Colonel Theepan, Colonel Jeyam, LTTE military advisor Dinesh, head of the Education unit of Tamil Eelam Ilankumaran, Head of LTTE justice department Para, Thamilenthi, Mannar division commander Laxman and LTTE secretariat administrator Neethan garlanded the remains of Brigadier Balraj.

 

Earlier, several thousand members of the public had had an opportunity to pay their last respects to Brigadier Balraj when the casket was kept at Mallaawi, Vanni.

 

Colonel Ramesh, one of Senior LTTE commanders, eulogized Brig. Balraj at the event in Mallaawi.

 

Col. Theepan and several LTTE military commanders for the Northern Front including Colonel Mugunthan and Colonel Kumunan laid garlands over the remains of late Brigadier Balraj. C. Navaratnarajah, President of Kilinochchi Traders Association, presided over the event.

 

Press reports said a number of Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) Kfir jet fighters flew over the skies in a provocative act to intimidate the public during the event.