UNHRC ‘judgement’ harps on Samaraweera oration
Except New Zealand, none of the State participants at the UNHRC on ‘Sri Lanka’, Wednesday, has touched the crux of the conflict in the island. Only the New Zealand representative ever uttered the word Tamil in urging solutions. The approach of the UN, set from the very beginning by the USA, totally disregards giving any open recognition to the national cause of the nation of Eezham Tamils and looks at the conflict entirely from the point of saving State in the island. What it painstakingly ‘recognises’ is never to offend the genocidal State. An added dimension visible in the latest UNHRC session is the highlight of the blanket term, “crimes by all sides” to get excused from the crime of not recognising the genocide committed on one by all. Again the line was originally set by the USA.
In conceding to domestic mechanism, most of the State members at the session on Wednesday were harping on the regime change in Colombo and ‘promises’ given by its foreign minister, Mangala Samaraweera.
The word of Mangala Samaraweera, who has no real authority or command over the masses in the island, is taken as a guarantee by the UNHRC member States, while the calls of the NPC and Tamil Nadu Chief Ministers reflecting nearly a century-old experience of the nation of Eezham Tamils with the Sinhala State have been ignored.
Only a few member States such as Estonia, Sierra Leone and Albania, not caring for shopping with genocidal Sri Lanka, spoke sense at the session.
The EU States have taken a common stand of preferring international involvement but agreeing to domestic mechanism.
The ‘time and space’ argument was ostensibly used by some member States, including Montenegro, as neither the genocide legacy in the island nor the national liberation aspiration of Eezham Tamils is never recognised or discussed, and the agenda is not to arrest the structural genocide but to consolidate the State.
The UN Deputy High Commissioner of Human Rights speaking at the end of the session sounded like canvassing for the Washington-Colombo tabled resolution. The UNICEF representative was out of context in referring to the ‘beauty’ of the island at a meeting where an Amnesty International speaker and a father of a killed child broke down while speaking.
There were some comical statements too. The British representative was urging ‘Sri Lanka’ to come out of the “legacy of the past.” Of course, Eezham Tamils want exactly that – to come out of the British colonial legacy of united and unitary State in the island.
The lone wolf, still speaking of countering “terrorism and separatism” in defending genocidal Sri Lanka was Pakistan. Was its representative arguing against the partition of British India and the very existence of Pakistan?
Chronology:
27.09.15 Dubious "Sovereignty" defence
கருத்துகள் இல்லை:
கருத்துரையிடுக