President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s Victory Day speech
this year on May 19 was largely a defensive discourse justifying the continued
presence large army formations in the North. The sense of triumphalism that had
become hallmark of Victory Day speeches was missing this year.
This is understandable as the President’s speeches
from last year onwards have become increasingly reactive as international focus
on Sri Lanka in recent times had been presenting it in bad light. Many of
Sri Lanka’s problems are based on age-old prejudices and three decades of bad
blood between the ethnic communities.
The U.S. report said: “There were instances in
which elements of the security forces acted independently of civilian control.
The major human rights problems were unlawful killings by security forces and
government-allied paramilitary groups, often in predominantly Tamil areas,
which led many to regard them as politically motivated, and attacks on and
harassment of civil society activists, persons viewed as Liberation Tigers of
Tamil Eelam (LTTE) sympathizers, and journalists by persons allegedly tied to
the government, which created an environment of fear and self-censorship.
“Other serious human rights problems included disappearances,
as well as a lack of accountability for thousands who disappeared in previous
years. Security forces tortured and abused detainees, poor prison conditions
remained a problem, and authorities arbitrarily arrested and detained citizens.
A number of suspects detained by police or other security forces died under
questionable circumstances.”
This is not the first time such concerns have been
expressed by the U.S. and the West. But what makes it damaging is it has come
after the passing of the much-maligned UNHRC resolution seeking accountability
from Sri Lanka.
Specifically referring to the presence of army in
the North the President in his speech said: “We are aware that the armed forces
do not participate in the administration of the North or East. These regions
are administered by the public service and the police. Despite this there are
many who shout that the security forces camps in these areas should be removed.
They ask us why they are not removed. But no one asks whether those who make such
demands are not seeking to achieve what Prabhakaran failed to obtain through
the use of ship loads of arms, aerial attacks, sea tiger and human suicide bomb
attacks through 30 years of war of terror. Are they now not asking this through different means?”
The
President’s statement regarding troops not participating in administration in
North is not borne out by ground realities where troops have been interfering
even in birthday parties, let alone indoor meetings of parliament members in
Jaffna. This would mean troops are being ‘used’ unofficially.
A second aspect is the President has hinted at a
potential resurgence of Tamil militancy and armed struggle in Northern Province
as a justification for keeping troops in the North. Even if this requirement
–which is notional at present - is accepted, it does not require the huge
number of troops stationed at present in the North.
British High Commissioner in Sri Lanka HC Rankin
has also contested President Rajapaksa’s claims on the role and presence of the
army in the North. While conceding Sri Lanka’s right to maintain normal
military bases throughout the country, like in the UK, he said the military
deployment in the Northern and Eastern Province was very much different than
that in other parts of the country. Rankin alleged that the government was
maintaining a very heavy military presence in the Northern Region.
The statistics on army deployment in the North bear
out the British High Commissioner’s concern was the same as Tamil minority
concern. Out of 13 Divisions plus a number of independent brigades of army,
barring four-division strength (about 40,000) and about 10,000 troops in
training establishments and on other duties, balance of nine divisions and
independent brigades with a strength of 150,000 troops are deployed in
Northern Province.
According to latest census figures (released by
Census Department in June 2012) Northern Province has a population of 997,754
(Tamils 934,392) out of Sri Lanka’s total of 20.2 million population. If we
take these population figures, the troop deployment works out to about one
soldier deployed for every six persons (including men, women and children) in
Northern Province! Imagine what would have been the popular reaction if
one soldier is deployed for every six members in a Southern Province!
[Of course, these figures will be disputed by the
security establishment. Jaffna Security Forces Commander Major General
Mahinda Hathurusinghe had told The Island that at present there were 15,600
troops in Jaffna Peninsula - three Divisions were deployed across the peninsula
and Jaffna islands. Do three divisions make only 15,600 troops in Sri Lanka
army? I have my reservations. ]
In his first Victory Day speech in 2009, President
Rajapaksa said (made in Tamil, so that Tamil population understood him):
"Heroic troops! The war against the terrorists is now over. It is now the
time to win over the hearts of the Tamil people. The Tamil speaking people
should be protected. They should be able to live without fear and mistrust. That
is today the responsibility of us all!"
Apparently, the army seems to have taken the
President’s advice literally to protect each and every Tamil. Otherwise,
deploying such a large number of troops mostly composed of Sinhalas, even three
years after the end of what is referred as a 'humanitarian war' (an oxymoron
phrase) is not understandable. If it is not so, why deploy such large number of
troops unless outburst of insurgency is imminent in the North? As there are no
such indications, such a deployment would indicate the military establishment
does not consider the prevailing situation in the North as normal. Is it
so?
President Rajapaksa’s May 19th speech stressed that
it would not be possible to remove armed forces camps in the North: “It is
necessary to ask those who call for the removal of the armed forces from the
North whether the ‘Diaspora’ and Eelamists have stopped their work although the
country has returned to normal. It is no secret that those who conscripted
children to war, and other war criminals who are leaders of the LTTE, are
acting with freedom in foreign countries. Just as much as their work their
demands also remain the same; they seek the same ends through different means.
Therefore, we must ask if we in a position to remove the armed forces camps in
the North and reduce our attention national security. That is not possible.
Armed services camps are not found in the North alone. They are seen
throughout the country. They are in Colombo and Giruvapattu in the South. These
are found in our country. Not in any foreign country.”
The President's argument has three elements of
doubtful validity: (1) presence of army in North is related the work of the
Diaspora and ‘Eelamists’ who are acting with freedom in foreign countries; (2)
removing armed forces in the North will reduce attention to national security;
(3) Army camps are found not only in the North but throughout the country so
why remove them.
It is a shame that sabre rattling speeches by a
small number of Tamils living a few thousand miles away is affecting the
deployment of a national army of 200,000 that had recently vanquished a 100,000
armed Tamils.
If the history of Tamil insurgency is
anything to go by, it did not originate in Canada or UK. It came about after
the utter failure of Sri Lanka politicians including the Tamil kind to hammer
out workable solution to the grievances of Tamil minorities. So if at all the
President is serious about neutralising the Diaspora elements and Eelamist
efforts to revive the LTTE, the solution to lies in Jayawardana-pura and Temple
Trees and not in the North, where a hapless population (with 42,565 war widows)
is trying to survive the day so that they can live tomorrow.
Large scale visible presence of troops in any
civilian area (I am saying from own experience as a military officer who has
worked in a number of insurgency areas) always makes the population
uncomfortable not only in Sri Lanka but also everywhere. This feeling of
discomfort is more likely in Northern Province because during the last three
decades men (and women too) in uniforms of different hues had seriously
dislocated normal life (what an understatement for the war weary) of civilian
population. So deployment in the North is qualitatively different from those in
Colombo or Giruvapattu in the South. Unfortunately, the President does not seem
to have noticed this sensitive aspect.
The recent comments of former Army Commander Sarath
Fonseka on the same subject are interesting. Answering the question on
the need for continued presence of military in Wanni three years after
war, he said there was definitely a need. “But, we must decide to what
extent they are needed, what they should do and where they should be. These
things have to be taken into consideration. There are 12,000 former rehabilitated
combatants. They can be good people. But, they can be misled. You need only 200
people to create problems in these areas.”
While the presence of former militants in the North
justified deployment of troops there, it is important to note the operative
part of the General’s statement is “we must decide to what extent they are
needed, what they should do and where they should be.”
Army had always been present in the North in the
past, even before the insurgency. And now after three decades of insurgency, no
one can dispute its presence there. But it is the numbers and the way they
operate that matters. Too large a number and too visible a presence of troops
roject a lack of trust in the population and a feeling of insecurity among the
rulers in their own administrative and internal security set up.
A ball park figure for pruning would suggest one
fifth of the present strength of army in the North – after all Jaffna and
Mullaitivu are not Timbuktu in Africa. And troops should stop intervening in
normal life of the people and leave it to the police to deal with the
population. Taking the troops away from policing duties will also give
confidence to civil administration and police to take decisions without looking
back at the Big Brother – the army.
There used to be talk of recruiting Tamil soldiers
in the army; but nothing much appears to have happened. With the army already
bloated beyond national requirements it may never come through in any sizeable
numbers to make Sri Lanka army truly a national one. And that is all the more
reason for the government and defence establishment to scale down the numbers
and reduce presence of army in the North. And this can be a truly home grown solution
that works unlike many others only in the realm of thought process.
It would also validate President Rajapaksa’s
statement, “We have now given a new meaning to all the blood, sweat and tears
shed by them on behalf of the nation.” Otherwise it is likely to be dismissed
as yet another political overstatement.
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group Note No 654 dated June 27, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment