Ceylon Today Editorial

Preventing new ‘Avatars’

20 March 2017

Timely action has been taken by the government to curb the inflow of religious fanatics into the country.

According to Immigration and Emigration Chief Nihal Ranasinghe, his office will coordinate closely with the Ministry of Defence to monitor religious fanatics who come under the guise of 'religious scholars' with ulterior motives.

The emergence of Islamic State (IS) terrorism remains a huge threat to human civilization in recent years. Islamic State terrorism uses the Islamic faith as a shield to continue with its ruthless and meaningless war to create adverse situations globally.

Islam being one of the foremost religions in the world, Prophet Mohamed's preaching in the Al-Quran on brotherhood and human civilization with divinity have been misinterpreted by the gun toting Islamic State to create chaotic situations.

Several countries have already taken precautionary measures to closely monitor the activities of Islamic State activists and to prevent any form of threat from them.

In recent years, India has strengthened its intelligence network to curb Islamic State terror activities in the country. Indian officials have even succeeded in apprehending Islamic State activists and thwarted successfully several of their attempts to ignite 'blood baths' in the country.

As Buddhism is followed by the majority of the people in Sri Lanka, all major religions in the world are being practised amicably in the Island without leaving room for religious extremism. There were earlier instances where religious fanatics were aroused by unscrupulous political elements in the Island. However, the manner in which secularism is safeguarded under the guidance of several scholarly, spiritual leaders in the Island is exemplary.

Whenever a disturbance occurred in the Island based on religious issues, the countrymen by and large combined their effort to ensure that the disturbance is not spread by ridiculing secularism.

Sri Lanka being a country crippled by three decades of terrorist war is now gradually limping back to stabilize itself erasing the scars of war and strengthening peace and reconciliation, in the Island.

During the war period it was important to note, the supportive role played by religious leaders to maintain peace and harmony in the country despite attacks carried out on several important places of worship in various parts of the country.

However, a week ago in Kathankudy in the Eastern Province ideological differences between two Islamic groups had led to violence creating a fear psychosis among innocent civilians.

As a significant number of Sri Lankan expatriate workers remain in the Middle East they could get attracted towards religious extremism, and religious fanatics under the guise of scholars and spiritual leaders could even attempt to step into the Island to achieve their ulterior motives.

Sri Lanka has already intensified precautionary measures to curb Islamic State terrorism by developing links with international security agencies.

However, the latest move to maintain extra vigilance to prevent the inflow of religious fanatics by introducing visa restrictions could be considered a timely action.

As religious values and philosophies of all major religions in the world are well preserved and followed with great veneration by the people of all faiths in a civilized manner, there is no need for new preachers or fresh religious ideologies to be allowed to destroy the healthy secularism existing in Sri Lanka.

With the end of the separatist war in 2009, Sri Lanka is now focused towards developing its economy destroyed by the unnecessary war.

Apart from the defence circles focusing on preventive measures such as visa restrictions to religious fanatics, the people in the country should also act wisely and not be carried away by these new 'avatars'.

Daily News Editorial

A UNPer’s lament

20 March 2017

Kurunegala District UNP parliamentarian Indunil Thushara is a much aggrieved man. He laments that although he had striven hard for the victory of President Maithripala Sirisena he had been overlooked for Ministerial office. He said three individuals from Kurunegala who worked against President Sirisena's victory were today Ministers. He also said that people were wondering why the government had so far not nabbed any rogues.

The MP is not alone in his predicament. Many UNP parliamentarians, some of whom even risked their lives working for the President, at the last Presidential election, have the same grievance. They are justified to a great extent. Having been in the Opposition for the last two decades they would naturally like to savour the fruits of office. To add insult to injury, some UNP MPs have even been forced to serve as deputy ministers or state ministers under SLFP ministers who themselves worked against the President. One such minister who insulted the President at a personal level during the election campaign is today an important minister while another who vilified former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga in a most degrading manner too is a minister. On the other hand the UNP MPs who braved all odds to enthrone the Common Candidate are forced to take a backseat in the government.

However galling as it may be, the UNP MPs who sacrificed a lot, but received little or nothing for their trouble, should learn to grin and bear and accept the consequences of a Unity Government. They should also bear in mind that the move was the brainchild of their own leader Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. The UNP won the general election by a razor thin majority and there was the very real possibility of Mahinda Rajapaksa buying over some MPs from the minority parties to form a government of his own and stake the claim for the Premiership. In such an eventuality all would have been lost to those MPs who are now harbouring grievances. Besides, the constitutionally prescribed numerical limit for ministers has already been reached and there is no way that the President could add to the exiting numbers. This is one of the reasons that has even stalled some of the Joint Opposition MPs from crossing over to the government. There is also the question of a bloated Cabinet.

Be that as it may, the disgruntled UNP MPs should take to heart from the fact that they have a government led by their party after over two decades and make a meaningful contribution towards taking the country forward. Besides, a government jointly formed by the once arch foes is a good thing that has happened to the country, putting paid to the contentious and vituperative politics we have been witnessing right all along. Since Independence the trend had always been for the victor at an election to call a halt to the projects and proposals of the departing regime and commence their own thing, with the vicious cycle continuing, stifling development and progress. Now for the first time both major parties are working together in unison, which indeed is a refreshing experience and redounds to the good of the country. With both parties agreeing to extend their cooperation for the duration of the present government one can hope for positive developments, unlike before, when rancorous politics retarded progress.

Of course there are certain SLFP MPs who are trying to rock the boat and make statements and remarks that could cause damage to this unity. Such elements should be reined in by the President, if the present arrangement is to proceed unhindered. This is also sometimes seized upon by members of the Joint Opposition to make the public believe that cracks are emerging within the Unity Government. True, there could naturally be differences, when, once arch rivals happen to work together, as in the present instance. Besides, the policies and ideology of the UNP and SLFP differ, although it must be stated that the gulf in the economic policies of the two parties have narrowed considerably, thanks to the course correction made by CBK when she was President. However these factors should not be allowed to stand in the way of unity.

Be that as it may, the President should appreciate the contribution made by the UNP towards his victory, when a majority of the SLFPers now in government were solidly behind Mahinda Rajapaksa. Hence any move to sideline UNP MPs would not only seem ungracious but will have other consequences. A disgruntled set of MPs in the government is bound to affect its forward march. Many are the times recently when groups of UNP MPs were seen summoning press conferences to voice their grievances over the utterances of certain SLFP MPs which no doubt would have been sweet music to the members of the JO. MP Thushara's lamentation is a reflection of this frustration being harboured by a section of the UNP MPs. It would be wise for both the President and Prime Minister to discuss matters with these UNP backbenchers and alley their concerns, without letting things to fester within and cause disharmony in the Unity Government.

The Island Editorial

The cost of killing savage killers

20 March 2017

 

Last week’s reduction of the murder conviction of Royal Marine Sergeant Alexander Blackman, currently in jail for shooting an injured Taliban terrorist in Afghanistan in 2011, to manslaughter is of interest to all countries faced with accountability issues. Five judges of the Court Martial Appeal Court in London overturned the original judgment against Blackman on grounds of ‘diminished responsibility’. They held that Blackman had suffered from ‘quite exceptional stressors’.

Blackman’s predicament typifies that of all military personnel, engaged in battling savage terrorists the world over. Royal Marines were fighting an elusive enemy in a hostile terrain, sown with mines, against numerous odds when the alleged incident occurred. War is not a game of football. Not even football matches are free from clashes though no one risks his life therein. Blackman’s colleagues have said they did not call for help to remove the injured enemy because they knew the Taliban terrorists would target the vehicles carrying medics et al. Battlefield excesses must, no doubt, be avoided, but those who champion human rights from the refuge of five-star hotels may not understand how the mind of a soldier, trapped in a slay-or-be-slain situation, works.

It is only natural that the British public leapt to Blackman’s defence and celebrated the reduction of his conviction. They also raised funds for his appeal. They know, as the then British Prime Minister Gordon Brown declared in 2009, soldiers like Blackman were fighting in Afghanistan to ‘keep Britain’s streets safe’. The British media, too, handled the issue in such a way that the scales were tilted in favour of the incarcerated Royal Marine. They told the world his side of the story and revealed the circumstances which had led to the incident. Leading the campaign from the front, The Daily Mail took up cudgels for Blackman; it has boasted that it was instrumental in having his conviction downgraded to manslaughter on the basis of expert opinion that he suffered from combat stress. If only the western media acted likewise in handling allegations against the armed forces of other countries as well!

In this country, too, anti-LTTE groups, a few months ago, collected funds to help a soldier who was ordered by courts to pay compensation to the family of a Tiger he had shot dead while the victim was escaping from their custody. The government has drawn heavy flak for cosponsoring a UNHRC resolution which calls for a hybrid war crimes probe. What the situation will be like in the event of a war crime investigation getting underway is not difficult to imagine.

One may argue that Britain has set an example by trying one of her elite commandos for a war crime. While this argument holds water to a considerable extent the fact remains that the overturning of Blackman’s conviction points to a serious lapse on the part of a lower court and shows that the British judges hearing war crimes cases are far from infallible. Initially, many thought it was an open and shut case with Blackman being found guilty as charged. Those who are calling for the participation of Commonwealth judges including those from Britain in the war crimes tribunal to be set up here ought to realise that their foreign gods, too, have feet of clay.

Meanwhile, a question that has gone unasked is why the US, which is leading a global human rights campaign hasn’t acted like the UK where the execution of Osama bin Laden is concerned. Blackman was suffering from combat stress. The US commandos who raided bin Laden’s hideout in 2011 were free from such problems, but they killed the unarmed terrorist leader while the then US President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and all defence big guns were watching the operation live at the White House. Since Obama could communicate with the troops in action and was in control of the situation as the Commander-in-Chief, shouldn’t he also be held accountable for the extrajudicial execution of an unarmed terrorist?