US to table UN Resolution against Sri Lanka over War Crimes

[Indischer]

Most of the relatives made for Pakistan in '48 - a few of them made it into Pakistan whilst the rest were cut along the way !

The handful that remained moved out of India to other countries over the decades !

I don't think I've got any relative left on the other side.

Nope - Pakistanis can't visit Kashmir as far as I know so none of us has visited Kashmir !

oh...sorry about that...The people in the North have really experienced some major traumas over the years. In the south though, we remain blissfully isolated from all this. It's almost like 200 years ago that the region where I come from saw any bloodshed and wars.

 

[HeinzG]

Wrong. You don't care about the benefits of all Sri Lankans, and therein lies the problem. To you, Tamils of Sri Lanka are third-rate citizens for some reason. Unless you correct this attitude, I guess violence will return again. And the fact that we've stopped our funding or support to Tamil separatists indicates our seriousness in having better ties with SL. But if SL doesn't need it, then so be it.

Where do we made them third class citizen? You tell me. What are the reasons to come to such conclusions?

 

[Hypersonicmissiles]

All UN resolutions will be vetoed by us and Russia.

 

[Saradiel]

And the issue won't rest until some semblance of justice is also provided for the SL Tamils.
Unless Sri Lanka is ready to accept that it's Army behaved badly in a few instances during the War, they will continue to feel that their justice is being drowned out by the Sinhala majority, which will continue to affect India-SL ties. Believe me, most Indians are happy that the LTTE menace has ended, and that violence has ended in Sri Lanka. But if Sinhala Politicians continue to deny justice to these folks, there's every chance that another rebellion may brew against the establishment or State.

You are a perect example of a gullible person.

1. the priority of tamils in SL is not so called justice. the ones who brag about 'justice ' is the LTTE supporters in the west and the politicians that are controlled by them. The priority for the tamils in North is employment and rebuilding in the north. The reality is robbing of fish by your TN fishermen is a far serious issue to them than the army in North. Because it directly affects their livelihood. So i see it is quite an irony and a hypocrasy when Indians (especially TN ones) cry for SL tamils while making them lose their own livelihood.

2. SL have always punished any soldier who has been arrested for any wrong doing. In the history of 30 year war fare soldiers have been punished and imprisoned. These are not some slap in the wrist kind punishments like the americans give to their army, but real ones. Therefore the argument SLA need to punish its wrong doers is not enirely correct.

3. You take CH4 videos as evidence. Right but in a court of law they are not sufficient enough to prove charges. And i dont think SLA would charge its soldiers for killing LTTE cadres (wether surrendered or not). You cant expect that from SLA because that is something none of the armies all over the world do. In every war surrendered combatants can be killed. Sameway SLA army soldiers have been killed by LTTE.

4. However the army or gov hasnt maintained a policy of killing surrendered LTTE cadres. That is why more than 13000 was released after rehabilitation. That is more than anyother gov has done in any part of the world.

5. And CH4 doesnt show attacks against civilians at all. All the execution videos (lets agree for the sake of the argument) shows combatants being executed, so justice for civilians arent really a matter.

6. The number of civilian deaths given by propagandists range from 40000 to 176000. So they too cant agree on a figure. The reality is the UN report said there can be deaths between 4000- 40000 and that these figures can be disputed. And the injured to dead ratio doesnt show such a huge number of deaths.

7. Most of the media reports are not verified reports and the fact that LTTE front organisations still are in good shape in west and that they influence especially british politicians is a fact.
8. US is using the end of conflict as a means to get into the indian ocean masked as human rights is also apparent.

 

[Indischer]

You are a perect example of a gullible person.

1. the priority of tamils in SL is not so called justice. the ones who brag about 'justice ' is the LTTE supporters in the west and the politicians that are controlled by them. The priority for the tamils in North is employment and rebuilding in the north. The reality is robbing of fish by your TN fishermen is a far serious issue to them than the army in North. Because it directly affects their livelihood. So i see it is quite an irony and a hypocrasy when Indians (especially TN ones) cry for SL tamils while making them lose their own livelihood.

2. SL have always punished any soldier who has been arrested for any wrong doing. In the history of 30 year war fare soldiers have been punished and imprisoned. These are not some slap in the wrist kind punishments like the americans give to their army, but real ones. Therefore the argument SLA need to punish its wrong doers is not enirely correct.

3. You take CH4 videos as evidence. Right but in a court of law they are not sufficient enough to prove charges. And i dont think SLA would charge its soldiers for killing LTTE cadres (wether surrendered or not). You cant expect that from SLA because that is something none of the armies all over the world do. In every war surrendered combatants can be killed. Sameway SLA army soldiers have been killed by LTTE.

4. However the army or gov hasnt maintained a policy of killing surrendered LTTE cadres. That is why more than 13000 was released after rehabilitation. That is more than anyother gov has done in any part of the world.

5. And CH4 doesnt show attacks against civilians at all. All the execution videos (lets agree for the sake of the argument) shows combatants being executed, so justice for civilians arent really a matter.

6. The number of civilian deaths given by propagandists range from 40000 to 176000. So they too cant agree on a figure. The reality is the UN report said there can be deaths between 4000- 40000 and that these figures can be disputed. And the injured to dead ratio doesnt show such a huge number of deaths.

7. Most of the media reports are not verified reports and the fact that LTTE front organisations still are in good shape in west and that they influence especially british politicians is a fact.
8. US is using the end of conflict as a means to get into the indian ocean masked as human rights is also apparent.

1. Leave the Tamils of India out of this. How exactly have you Sinhala treated your Tamils? Sri Lanka is also a multi-ethnic country like India. But your Establishment and Laws seem to favour Sinhala over other groups.

2. Why exactly did the Tamils take up arms? Has the issue that brought about the rebellion truly been addressed?

3. Is videographic evidence inadmissible in SL courts? Suppose a cam captures a killing, and no other witnesses come forth other than this, will the perpetrator go scot-free in Lanka?

4. So in Sri Lanka, killing captured combatants is allowed? Great! But Sri Lanka should also know, being a member nation of UN, about the norms and protocol laid out by UN on handling such combatants.

5. The US needs a means to get into Indian Ocean? Through Lanka? Hilarious! They already have a huge base in Diego Garcia, and India isn't hostile to their interests. Don't give too much importance to your 'strategic' location by bringing such BS to the table.

The tamils of Sri Lanka feel wronged and have many legitimate greivances against the Sinhala-run Government of Sri Lanka. Address them first, make them feel as Sri Lankan as you are, and then you'll find that the Eelam and other BS will automatically subside. Don't defend the atrocities of your Army as some glorious justification for the atocities committed by a Terrorist Organisation.

 

[airpower183]

1. Leave the Tamils of India out of this. How exactly have you Sinhala treated your Tamils? Sri Lanka is also a multi-ethnic country like India. But your Establishment and Laws seem to favour Sinhala over other groups.

Sri lanka has Tamil as an official language despite being 4% of the population and despite Sinhalese being known and spoken by all.

Why has india made hindi the only national language? while there are 100s of millions with other languages?

3. Is videographic evidence inadmissible in SL courts? Suppose a cam captures a killing, and no other witnesses come forth other than this, will the perpetrator go scot-free in Lanka?

The admissions of evidence is regulated by the Evidence Act.

For video evidence to be admitted, it needs to be pass the technical legislative specifications.
The camera need to be inspected and calibrated by an authorized technicians at intervals determined by the legislation.
The storage, handling, encryption and processing of the video content must be in accordance to the legislative requirements.

Even passing the above admission criteria CCTV footage on its own cannot be admitted as evidence on its own to prove a fact. It can be admitted as complementary evidence with other evidence source to establish a fact.

It's very easy to miss identify people purely based on CCTV footage.

4. So in Sri Lanka, killing captured combatants is allowed? Great! But Sri Lanka should also know, being a member nation of UN, about the norms and protocol laid out by UN on handling such combatants.

See my post Sri Lanka Guity of Tamil Genocide, India guilty of Complicity in Genocide

The legal context for the word 'genocide' arises from the General Assembly Resolution 260 adopted by the UN on the 9 December 1948.

Now when we determine if a crime has occurred, first thing we do is determine is there a 'cause of action' i.e legal precedence. The next thing we do is determine weather we have legal jurisdiction. Only after these two elements of Law have been satisfied can we then look into evidence to support the violation of a law and thus the commission of a crime.

GAR 260 was Acceded by Sri lanka on 12 October 1950.

GAR 260 requires all signatories to the treaty to be in compliance with one another. As I cannot see "Eelam Tamil" being a signatory to the treaty, Sri lanka remains to be in compliance with GAR 260.

In relation to jurisdiction, the UN does not have jurisdiction in Sri lanka.

As such a treaty is made in law in two ways, either acceded or ratified. Prior to ratification or accession, a country normally reviews the treaty to determine whether national laws are consistent with its provisions and to consider the most appropriate means of promoting compliance with the treaty.

Most commonly, countries that are promoting the convention sign shortly after it has been adopted. They then ratify the treaty when all of their domestically required legal procedures have been fulfilled. Other countries may begin with the domestic approval process and accede to the treaty once their domestic procedures have been completed, without signing the treaty first.

In conclusion I find that GAR 260 has jurisdiction in Sri lanka, and any corporates in violation of GAR 260 can be prosecuted and dealt with by Sri lankan courts in accordance to manner dictated by Law. I am also satisfied that breach of GAR 260 has not occurred by any individual with the Sri lankan Defence force engaged in hostile combat operation against "Eelam Tamil"

Therefore I am satisfied that the Sri lankan Armed Forces has maintained compliance with GAR 260.

 

[HeinzG]

1. Leave the Tamils of India out of this. How exactly have you Sinhala treated your Tamils? Sri Lanka is also a multi-ethnic country like India. But your Establishment and Laws seem to favour Sinhala over other groups.

Yes how? When Tamils in one part of Sri Lanka are happy with their relations with Sinhalese how come you say we mistreat Tamils?

2. Why exactly did the Tamils take up arms? Has the issue that brought about the rebellion truly been addressed?

The issue they took up arms because of their hatred of Sinhalese. It got nothing to do with Sinhalese attacking Tamils. All of this started in 1920s. Sinhalese were just reacting to what Tamils are doing.

3. Is videographic evidence inadmissible in SL courts? Suppose a cam captures a killing, and no other witnesses come forth other than this, will the perpetrator go scot-free in Lanka?

Only one evidence in not enough to prove who is guilty and who is not. Then why picking on Sri Lanka on this issue?

4. So in Sri Lanka, killing captured combatants is allowed? Great! But Sri Lanka should also know, being a member nation of UN, about the norms and protocol laid out by UN on handling such combatants.

Combatants and terrorists and two different breeds of fighters. Besides that SLA has left more than 10,000 Tamils terrorists unharmed. In a war it is natural to kill the enemy even after surrendering. Those decisions are depend on the actual situation of the battlefield.

5. The US needs a means to get into Indian Ocean? Through Lanka? Hilarious! They already have a huge base in Diego Garcia, and India isn't hostile to their interests. Don't give too much importance to your 'strategic' location by bringing such BS to the table.

Yeah that's why there is a US listening station located in Iranawila Sri Lanka. That's how much US trust India.

Beside that Diago Garcia is about be closed in the near future.

The tamils of Sri Lanka feel wronged and have many legitimate greivances against the Sinhala-run Government of Sri Lanka. Address them first, make them feel as Sri Lankan as you are, and then you'll find that the Eelam and other BS will automatically subside.

First make sure India treats the Sri Lankan refugees in Tamilnadu as humans first. Then you have the legitimate right to criticize.

Don't defend the atrocities of your Army as some glorious justification for the atocities committed by a Terrorist Organisation.

So what is your point? Should we have just watched the LTTE do what ever they like? You should have advocate the INA troops who have carried out the golden temple raid.

 

[INDIC]

Sri lanka has Tamil as an official language despite being 4% of the population and despite Sinhalese being known and spoken by all.

Why has india made hindi the only national language? while there are 100s of millions with other languages?

Height of illiteracy. As a Lankan you aren't even aware of percentage of Tamils in Sri Lanka.

 

[Indischer]

Yes how? When Tamils in one part of Sri Lanka are happy with their relations with Sinhalese how come you say we mistreat Tamils?



The issue they took up arms because of their hatred of Sinhalese. It got nothing to do with Sinhalese attacking Tamils. All of this started in 1920s. Sinhalese were just reacting to what Tamils are doing.



Only one evidence in not enough to prove who is guilty and who is not. Then why picking on Sri Lanka on this issue?



Combatants and terrorists and two different breeds of fighters. Besides that SLA has left more than 10,000 Tamils terrorists unharmed. In a war it is natural to kill the enemy even after surrendering. Those decisions are depend on the actual situation of the battlefield.




Yeah that's why there is a US listening station located in Iranawila Sri Lanka. That's how much US trust India.

Beside that Diago Garcia is about be closed in the near future.




First make sure India treats the Sri Lankan refugees in Tamilnadu as humans first. Then you have the legitimate right to criticize.



So what is your point? Should we have just watched the LTTE do what ever they like? You should have advocate the INA troops who have carried out the golden temple raid.

1. Tamils in all parts of Sri Lanka need to feel that way. I'm not saying they were right in advocating an insurgency against the State. But that the fissures that led them to such desperation remain today, and are exacerbated by the high-handedness of this Sinhala Regime. You say they hate Sinhala. What made them hate you?

2. Who's picking on Sri Lanka? The Government, which provides the legitimacy to Army Ops is considered responsible when it's troops indulge in War crimes. Hence, pressure is being brought against the Govt to comply with a few internationally recognized and followed rules of military engagement.

3. In a war it is NOT natural to kill an enemy combatant after he/she has surrendered. Where did you pick up this nonsense? Even if you follow your own rules, don't at least be so idiotic enough to film it and then allow it to come out in the open!

4. The US spies on all it's allies. No big deal there. But the assertion that the US is doing this in order to force it's way into Lanka is BS. By your own admission, they're already inside Lanka!

5. They're by definition refugees. They aren't citizens of India to enjoy all regular rights as normal citizens. They're your citizens! Why have your Governments made them refugees in the first place? Or are you hinting that all Tamils are Indians by default?

Sri lanka has Tamil as an official language despite being 4% of the population and despite Sinhalese being known and spoken by all.

Why has india made hindi the only national language? while there are 100s of millions with other languages?




The admissions of evidence is regulated by the Evidence Act.

For video evidence to be admitted, it needs to be pass the technical legislative specifications.
The camera need to be inspected and calibrated by an authorized technicians at intervals determined by the legislation.
The storage, handling, encryption and processing of the video content must be in accordance to the legislative requirements.

Even passing the above admission criteria CCTV footage on its own cannot be admitted as evidence on its own to prove a fact. It can be admitted as complementary evidence with other evidence source to establish a fact.

It's very easy to miss identify people purely based on CCTV footage.




See my post Sri Lanka Guity of Tamil Genocide, India guilty of Complicity in Genocide

The legal context for the word 'genocide' arises from the General Assembly Resolution 260 adopted by the UN on the 9 December 1948.

Now when we determine if a crime has occurred, first thing we do is determine is there a 'cause of action' i.e legal precedence. The next thing we do is determine weather we have legal jurisdiction. Only after these two elements of Law have been satisfied can we then look into evidence to support the violation of a law and thus the commission of a crime.

GAR 260 was Acceded by Sri lanka on 12 October 1950.

GAR 260 requires all signatories to the treaty to be in compliance with one another. As I cannot see "Eelam Tamil" being a signatory to the treaty, Sri lanka remains to be in compliance with GAR 260.

In relation to jurisdiction, the UN does not have jurisdiction in Sri lanka.

As such a treaty is made in law in two ways, either acceded or ratified. Prior to ratification or accession, a country normally reviews the treaty to determine whether national laws are consistent with its provisions and to consider the most appropriate means of promoting compliance with the treaty.

Most commonly, countries that are promoting the convention sign shortly after it has been adopted. They then ratify the treaty when all of their domestically required legal procedures have been fulfilled. Other countries may begin with the domestic approval process and accede to the treaty once their domestic procedures have been completed, without signing the treaty first.

In conclusion I find that GAR 260 has jurisdiction in Sri lanka, and any corporates in violation of GAR 260 can be prosecuted and dealt with by Sri lankan courts in accordance to manner dictated by Law. I am also satisfied that breach of GAR 260 has not occurred by any individual with the Sri lankan Defence force engaged in hostile combat operation against "Eelam Tamil"

Therefore I am satisfied that the Sri lankan Armed Forces has maintained compliance with GAR 260.

Hindi is NOT our National Language. English and Hindi are Official Languages, meaning the Central Government correspondences will be in these two languages. Hindi is not mandatorily taught across India. The State Governments are free to use their State Languages for official correspondence.

I prefer to discuss the Sri Lankan issue with other, more respectable members here. I don't want to waste my time with a guy who argued that Sri Lanka is a Landlocked country. Your understanding of other issues might be just as pea-brained.

 

[HeinzG]

1. Tamils in all parts of Sri Lanka need to feel that way. I'm not saying they were right in advocating an insurgency against the State. But that the fissures that led them to such desperation remain today, and are exacerbated by the high-handedness of this Sinhala Regime. You say they hate Sinhala. What made them hate you?

In 1920s when Briton was seeking the possibility of universal franchise to be granted to SL, Tamil politicians realized that they will never become the rulers of SL. Then they asked not to grant universal franchise in SL. They failed. In 1948 they asked for a 50% representation in parliment which is against the 20% actual percentage of the population. They failed again and then realizing their bad prospect opted for the separate nation theory. Actually they fueled the Tamil hatred of Sinhalese for their political gains.

2. Who's picking on Sri Lanka? The Government, which provides the legitimacy to Army Ops is considered responsible when it's troops indulge in War crimes. Hence, pressure is being brought against the Govt to comply with a few internationally recognized and followed rules of military engagement.

Sri Lanka is being picked by USA going against there plans for the Indian Ocean.
On what evidence? Those videos or the testimonies of ex-LTTE cadres? Don't you think they are biased?
SL will conduct trial when we received credible evidence. Hence till then it is no one right to judge Sri Lanka.

3. In a war it is NOT natural to kill an enemy combatant after he/she has surrendered. Where did you pick up this nonsense?

But unnatural things happens in a war. War is not played by the book. The rule apply to every one. Even US has done mistakes in the near past. Besides forgetting India.

Even if you follow your own rules, don't at least be so idiotic enough to film it and then allow it to come out in the open!

That is why the evidence in not authentic.

4. The US spies on all it's allies. No big deal there. But the assertion that the US is doing this in order to force it's way into Lanka is BS. By your own admission, they're already inside Lanka!

Who want the Trincomalee Harbor India or USA? Do not think you know every thing on US plans.

5. They're by definition refugees. They aren't citizens of India to enjoy all regular rights as normal citizens. They're your citizens! Why have your Governments made them refugees in the first place? Or are you hinting that all Tamils are Indians by default?

For the christ sake then why cry foul over the issues of Sri Lanka? Leave it to Sri Lankan to sort it out.

For once you and your fellow Indians are so keen on bringing the killers of Tamils in Sri Lanka but on the other hand you do not want the Tamil refugees in India to get regular right as normal citizens? So what is the catch here? What do India want? Surely it is not genuine concern on human rights.

Who ever they are they came to India seeking a better life. If India cannot give it back India should have sent them to Sri Lanka. Instead India made a living hell for them.

What I'm hinting about the all this said blood brother bond of Indian Tamils to Sri Lanka Tamils notion.

 

[manlion]

Resolution On Sri Lanka Presents To US Senate | Colombo Telegraph

That the Senate-

(1)commends the representatives of the United States on their leadership on United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution (UNHRC) 22/1, adopted by the UNHRC on March 21, 2013, which promotes reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka;

(2)calls on the United States and the international community to establish an independent international accountability mechanism to evaluate reports of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other human rights violations committed by both sides during and after the war in Sri Lanka;

(3)urges the Government of Sri Lanka to allow unimpeded access for media, international aid agencies, and human rights groups into all regions of the country, as well as to detention sites that may hold political and war prisoners;

(4)urges the Government of Sri Lanka to end its media restrictions, including the obstacles to the flow of information in the North and East, and bring to justice those responsible for attacks on journalists and newspaper offices; and

(5)calls upon the President to develop a comprehensive policy towards Sri Lanka that reflects United States interests, including respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law, economic interests, and security interests.

Who ever they are they came to India seeking a better life. If India cannot give it back India should have sent them to Sri Lanka. Instead India made a living hell for them.

What I'm hinting about the all this said blood brother bond of Indian Tamils to Sri Lanka Tamils notion.

blaming others is part of your game, US, UN, Britain, Canada Tamilnadu , Channel4 and Tamils (e.g Navin Pillai etc) are source of your misery ?

IRIN Asia | SRI LANKA: Refugees in India reluctant to return | Sri Lanka | Refugees/IDPs

TAMIL NADU, 4 September 2012 (IRIN) - More than three years after the end of Sri Lanka’s 1983-2009 civil war, most Sri Lankan refugees in India say they would rather not return, citing economic hardship and concern over human rights abuses.

 

[HeinzG]

IRIN Asia | SRI LANKA: Refugees in India reluctant to return | Sri Lanka | Refugees/IDPs

TAMIL NADU, 4 September 2012 (IRIN) - More than three years after the end of Sri Lanka’s 1983-2009 civil war, most Sri Lankan refugees in India say they would rather not return, citing economic hardship and concern over human rights abuses.

Very well now India has no worries. Grant them full citizenship. After all they are Tamils and they do not want to go to the "genocidal land"

FYI

Furthermore, it is estimated that more than half of the refugees in Indian camps were born in India and know little of life back in Sri Lanka. The largest wave of refugees arrived in the camps between 1983 and 1987, with many staying on and having children.

According to aid workers, living conditions in the government-run refugee camps vary from poor to adequate. Some live in thatched huts, others in small cement block houses; water and sanitation are problematic in the more remote camps.

Refugees apply for day release to access free health and education facilities, and informal jobs outside of the camps also allow refugees to supplement a monthly government grant of US$38 per family (two adults and one child).

Though UNHCR does not have access to the camps, four NGOs have been working with the refugees since 2006 and deliver 23 welfare schemes.

Meanwhile, refugees outside the camps do not face travel restrictions but lose out on their grant and access to welfare schemes.

IRIN Asia | SRI LANKA: Refugees in India reluctant to return | Sri Lanka | Refugees/IDPs

Now how run concentration camps?

 

[Saradiel]

1. Leave the Tamils of India out of this. How exactly have you Sinhala treated your Tamils? Sri Lanka is also a multi-ethnic country like India. But your Establishment and Laws seem to favour Sinhala over other groups.

2. Why exactly did the Tamils take up arms? Has the issue that brought about the rebellion truly been addressed?

3. Is videographic evidence inadmissible in SL courts? Suppose a cam captures a killing, and no other witnesses come forth other than this, will the perpetrator go scot-free in Lanka?

4. So in Sri Lanka, killing captured combatants is allowed? Great! But Sri Lanka should also know, being a member nation of UN, about the norms and protocol laid out by UN on handling such combatants.

5. The US needs a means to get into Indian Ocean? Through Lanka? Hilarious! They already have a huge base in Diego Garcia, and India isn't hostile to their interests. Don't give too much importance to your 'strategic' location by bringing such BS to the table.

The tamils of Sri Lanka feel wronged and have many legitimate greivances against the Sinhala-run Government of Sri Lanka. Address them first, make them feel as Sri Lankan as you are, and then you'll find that the Eelam and other BS will automatically subside. Don't defend the atrocities of your Army as some glorious justification for the atocities committed by a Terrorist Organisation.

1. And Tamils in India needs to take a leave out of SL issues. Sinhala people have treated tamils both in good ways and bad ways, rather like how other multi ethnic societies function. Tamils had problems and they faced riots. But these are natural in any post colonial multi ethnic country. Even in india didnt you have Gujarat 2002, Sick riot 1984 followed by massacres of Sikhs and Bombay 1992? the same way SL did undergo such episodes.
Do you know that tamils (majority of them) live amidst Sinhala people? Do you know that Colombo itself has a 30+% tamil ethnic people? and that there are many tamils in central parts of the country? If SL had a dangerous discriminative policy how does that hapen?

In constitution or law there is no discriminatory regulations. In SL all are equal before the law. No one barrs a tamil from holding a high office actually they do.

If what you are talking about is the Swabhasha act in 1956, it was corrected in 1987 and tamil is an official language now.

2. I assume you are ignorant on SL issues. The reason tamils took weapons is manifold. Yes discriminative policies (which are corrected now) and riots did affect it, spillover effect of Dravidian nationalism into Sri Lanka, India supporting tamil militancy due to geostrategic reasons, and of course history. It has been 5 years since the end of war and expecting SL to deliver and solve all the problems within that period is stupid. British took 70 years to come with a solution to Ireland. And now the same Brits talk about reconciliation here. (ironically)

3. You still didnt get it right? The reason is Cam did NOT capture any killing. what the cam captured is a photo of the alive person and of the dead person.

4. Not even in SL in all the world killing captured combatants is not allowed. This is not deciding what is morally right or wrong. The fact is killing captured combatants is a norm all over the world even in your india. That is a fact. And another fact is GOSL has arrested and rehabilitated 13000 rebels. That shows killing captured was not a policy. And Sl is not the only country that needs to upheld the UN norms. If the big boys are violating pretty much every UN norm all over the world, what is wrong if SL does the same to safegueard its territotial intergrity. Unlike US who bombed Japan and iraw SL defended its state from an existential threat. And who is US or any other country to check on SL? what authority they have. SL has a moral high ground above US.

5. US will lose Diargo Garcia in 2016. And read the following.
"At least three recent developments in the Indian Ocean Region are worth mentioning here. One is that the lease on Diego Garcia, a British-controlled territory in the Indian Ocean where the US has a military base, expires in 2016. Any agreement to extend, modify or end it has to be negotiated in 2014 between the US and the UK. The US used Diego Garcia as a long-range bombing base targeting Iraq and Afghanistan and for the CIA’s secret rendition flights.
These negotiations would be complicated for the big powers by the fact that Mauritius, which lost the Chagos islands including Diego Garcia in a colonial-era UK decision, is now staking its claim to sovereignty over the islands and will reportedly be party to the talks. The ‘Guardian’ in 2012 quoted an international law expert saying “The UK, now it has been made aware of the illegal use of Diego Garcia, has a duty not to renew the lease. It could and, in law should, return possession and control to Mauritius…” The expulsion of the Chagos islanders to accommodate the US military base has been described as “one of the worst violations of fundamental human rights perpetrated by Britain in the 20th century.” With all these considerations in the mix there would appear to be uncertainty, in US eyes, over the continuance of their Diego Garcia base.
Another factor affecting US interests in the region is that the Maldivian government has rejected the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that the US sought to negotiate to have a base in the Maldives. The announcement last year by former president Mohamed Waheed (that Maldives will not sign the agreement) was re-asserted by new President Abdulla Yameen at a press conference he held in Colombo on 22 January. Minister at the President’s Office Mohamed Hussain Shareef told reporters the deal raised issues of sovereignty and constitutionality.
The fact that the US is looking around for new options in the Indian Ocean Region is further reflected in a recent study by the Council on Foreign Relations, a New York based think tank. It recommended that with the troop pullout from Afghanistan in 2014 the US should explore the possibility of basing its military in India. The special report titled ‘Reorienting US Pakistan Strategy: From Af-Pak to Asia’ says the US should start discussions with Indian leaders on counter-terror cooperation “up to and including the possibility of basing US military and/or intelligence operatives in India to address Pakistan-based terrorist threats in a post-Afghanistan context,” the ‘New Indian Express’ reported.
Redesigning international architecture
It’s clear that the US, in the context of a rising China, is hunting for potential new bases in the Indian Ocean Region that has become key to controlling the world. Are the US moves against Sri Lanka in the UNHRC related to this project?
One observer who thinks so is Tamara Kunanayakam, Sri Lanka’s former ambassador to Cuba and later to the UN. The US needs to control the Eurasian region to maintain global supremacy, she said. This relates to the need to find ways to bring out the oil and gas that’s locked in the Caspian area. The US and its allies don’t have many options, they need to contain China, and Sri Lanka assumes importance because it is located on a strategic maritime route.
“The US is in the process of redesigning international architecture to give themselves a legal instrument to intervene unilaterally,” she told the ‘Sunday Times.’ ‘R2P’ (Responsibility to Protect) is a tool that justifies unilateral intervention, clothed in international human rights law. Sri Lanka is vulnerable because of what happened in 2009 and because the state is not confronting the danger, it is not united internally and not addressing the issues that divide it.
Kunanayakam also noted that the US wanted Trincomalee “for a long time,” and recalled that an important reason for the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord was former president J. R Jayewardena’s discussion with Washington regarding this natural harbour, and the Voice of America broadcasting station. Through an Annex to the Accord India ensured that Sri Lanka would not allow external powers a base, and would not permit VOA to be used for anything other than civilian purposes.
"
This is by former UN ambassoder of SL Kumanayagam (an ethnic tamil).

And what is the last point in US resolution that they presented to the parliament today?

5)calls upon the President to develop a comprehensive policy towards Sri Lanka that reflects United States interests, including respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law, economic interests, and security interests.


For you first lesson in geostrategy, IF USA is talking about human rights somewhere it has a lot of American geo strategic interests. Otherwise US has no concern for HR, they have toppled democratic governments, killed people and helped despotic rogue regimes if their interests are met. And SL is far from in a situation that needs UN or US intervention.

And do you think Indian ocean is all about India? Do you think US concern India as its all time ally? US doesnt have a single ally. US treats India as competition in indian ocean.

SL army didnt commit atrocities of a huge magnititute as you say. Atrocities do happen as in any war but not special ones to get special attention. US has done far more attrocities than SL can ever imagine. And SL has had elections in North and there is a tamil minister with a local government.

I dont say GOSL has been magnificient, but at the same time they have done a lot and not that bad as western media says.

 

[Indischer]

1. And Tamils in India needs to take a leave out of SL issues. Sinhala people have treated tamils both in good ways and bad ways, rather like how other multi ethnic societies function. Tamils had problems and they faced riots. But these are natural in any post colonial multi ethnic country. Even in india didnt you have Gujarat 2002, Sick riot 1984 followed by massacres of Sikhs and Bombay 1992? the same way SL did undergo such episodes.
Do you know that tamils (majority of them) live amidst Sinhala people? Do you know that Colombo itself has a 30+% tamil ethnic people? and that there are many tamils in central parts of the country? If SL had a dangerous discriminative policy how does that hapen?

In constitution or law there is no discriminatory regulations. In SL all are equal before the law. No one barrs a tamil from holding a high office actually they do.

If what you are talking about is the Swabhasha act in 1956, it was corrected in 1987 and tamil is an official language now.

2. I assume you are ignorant on SL issues. The reason tamils took weapons is manifold. Yes discriminative policies (which are corrected now) and riots did affect it, spillover effect of Dravidian nationalism into Sri Lanka, India supporting tamil militancy due to geostrategic reasons, and of course history. It has been 5 years since the end of war and expecting SL to deliver and solve all the problems within that period is stupid. British took 70 years to come with a solution to Ireland. And now the same Brits talk about reconciliation here. (ironically)

3. You still didnt get it right? The reason is Cam did NOT capture any killing. what the cam captured is a photo of the alive person and of the dead person.

4. Not even in SL in all the world killing captured combatants is not allowed. This is not deciding what is morally right or wrong. The fact is killing captured combatants is a norm all over the world even in your india. That is a fact. And another fact is GOSL has arrested and rehabilitated 13000 rebels. That shows killing captured was not a policy. And Sl is not the only country that needs to upheld the UN norms. If the big boys are violating pretty much every UN norm all over the world, what is wrong if SL does the same to safegueard its territotial intergrity. Unlike US who bombed Japan and iraw SL defended its state from an existential threat. And who is US or any other country to check on SL? what authority they have. SL has a moral high ground above US.

5. US will lose Diargo Garcia in 2016. And read the following.
"At least three recent developments in the Indian Ocean Region are worth mentioning here. One is that the lease on Diego Garcia, a British-controlled territory in the Indian Ocean where the US has a military base, expires in 2016. Any agreement to extend, modify or end it has to be negotiated in 2014 between the US and the UK. The US used Diego Garcia as a long-range bombing base targeting Iraq and Afghanistan and for the CIA’s secret rendition flights.
These negotiations would be complicated for the big powers by the fact that Mauritius, which lost the Chagos islands including Diego Garcia in a colonial-era UK decision, is now staking its claim to sovereignty over the islands and will reportedly be party to the talks. The ‘Guardian’ in 2012 quoted an international law expert saying “The UK, now it has been made aware of the illegal use of Diego Garcia, has a duty not to renew the lease. It could and, in law should, return possession and control to Mauritius…” The expulsion of the Chagos islanders to accommodate the US military base has been described as “one of the worst violations of fundamental human rights perpetrated by Britain in the 20th century.” With all these considerations in the mix there would appear to be uncertainty, in US eyes, over the continuance of their Diego Garcia base.
Another factor affecting US interests in the region is that the Maldivian government has rejected the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) that the US sought to negotiate to have a base in the Maldives. The announcement last year by former president Mohamed Waheed (that Maldives will not sign the agreement) was re-asserted by new President Abdulla Yameen at a press conference he held in Colombo on 22 January. Minister at the President’s Office Mohamed Hussain Shareef told reporters the deal raised issues of sovereignty and constitutionality.
The fact that the US is looking around for new options in the Indian Ocean Region is further reflected in a recent study by the Council on Foreign Relations, a New York based think tank. It recommended that with the troop pullout from Afghanistan in 2014 the US should explore the possibility of basing its military in India. The special report titled ‘Reorienting US Pakistan Strategy: From Af-Pak to Asia’ says the US should start discussions with Indian leaders on counter-terror cooperation “up to and including the possibility of basing US military and/or intelligence operatives in India to address Pakistan-based terrorist threats in a post-Afghanistan context,” the ‘New Indian Express’ reported.
Redesigning international architecture
It’s clear that the US, in the context of a rising China, is hunting for potential new bases in the Indian Ocean Region that has become key to controlling the world. Are the US moves against Sri Lanka in the UNHRC related to this project?
One observer who thinks so is Tamara Kunanayakam, Sri Lanka’s former ambassador to Cuba and later to the UN. The US needs to control the Eurasian region to maintain global supremacy, she said. This relates to the need to find ways to bring out the oil and gas that’s locked in the Caspian area. The US and its allies don’t have many options, they need to contain China, and Sri Lanka assumes importance because it is located on a strategic maritime route.
“The US is in the process of redesigning international architecture to give themselves a legal instrument to intervene unilaterally,” she told the ‘Sunday Times.’ ‘R2P’ (Responsibility to Protect) is a tool that justifies unilateral intervention, clothed in international human rights law. Sri Lanka is vulnerable because of what happened in 2009 and because the state is not confronting the danger, it is not united internally and not addressing the issues that divide it.
Kunanayakam also noted that the US wanted Trincomalee “for a long time,” and recalled that an important reason for the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord was former president J. R Jayewardena’s discussion with Washington regarding this natural harbour, and the Voice of America broadcasting station. Through an Annex to the Accord India ensured that Sri Lanka would not allow external powers a base, and would not permit VOA to be used for anything other than civilian purposes.
"
This is by former UN ambassoder of SL Kumanayagam (an ethnic tamil).

And what is the last point in US resolution that they presented to the parliament today?

5)calls upon the President to develop a comprehensive policy towards Sri Lanka that reflects United States interests, including respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law, economic interests, and security interests.


For you first lesson in geostrategy, IF USA is talking about human rights somewhere it has a lot of American geo strategic interests. Otherwise US has no concern for HR, they have toppled democratic governments, killed people and helped despotic rogue regimes if their interests are met. And SL is far from in a situation that needs UN or US intervention.

And do you think Indian ocean is all about India? Do you think US concern India as its all time ally? US doesnt have a single ally. US treats India as competition in indian ocean.

SL army didnt commit atrocities of a huge magnititute as you say. Atrocities do happen as in any war but not special ones to get special attention. US has done far more attrocities than SL can ever imagine. And SL has had elections in North and there is a tamil minister with a local government.

I dont say GOSL has been magnificient, but at the same time they have done a lot and not that bad as western media says.

Look, I'm actually have no agendas wrt the conflict, wish for stronger India-Sl ties, and look down upon Tamil Nationalism as a grave threat to India too. But I'm not foolish enough to believe that the SLA acted entirely professionally in the War. They stooped down to the level of LTTE in many instances. And accountability has been missing regarding action against such misdeeds. I'm sorry to say this, but Sinhalas alone are going to believe in this Nay-saying campaign being run by the Govt.

Whenever the US has committed War Crimes and they've been highlighted by the media, action has been taken against the errant personnel. That gives them the moral authority and right to talk ill about your Govt. Deny them that right by acknowledging the few mistakes and take action, and then see how many will still be against SL!

Regarding the Indian Ocean, I ask you this, will ANY SL Govt ever agree to a US Navy base on SL soil? NO. And taking action against those in the Govt who were respnsible/accountable for War-Crimes is not going to change the situation in any way.

 

[HeinzG]

Regarding the Indian Ocean, I ask you this, will ANY SL Govt ever agree to a US Navy base on SL soil? NO.

That's why they need someone they can control. i.e LTTE in the past TNA in the present. If they have a eelam who is going to oppose US presence in Indian ocean?