Talks should not begin with the LTTE as long as it is physically isolated and there is mistrust between the parties to the conflict, International alert General Secretary Kumar Rupesinghe said in an interview with The Sunday Times.
"As long as there is this deep mistrust then negotiations cannot and should not begin. I say should not because if negotiations are begun without adequate preparation they will quickly fall apart and Sri Lanka will be subject to a deeper and more violent cycle of war," Mr. Rupesinghe said denying that his organisation was involved in any mediation process between the government and the LTTE.
Mr. Rupesinghe said International Alert could only be a facilitator, providing technical support for mediation. Excerpts from the interview:
Q: There have been several newspaper reports that you will be mediating to end of the war in Sri Lanka. Have you begun your work?
KR: No, definitely not. International Alert is not a mediation organization. We have many skilled personnel within the organization and within our networks who can help to facilitate communication, give advice based on experience from other conflicts and other peace settlements and give technical support - for example through access to documentation from other settlements and the experience of those agreements in implementation.
My visit here was to meet with a wide spectrum of people who have an interest in ending the war and explain to them the strength of support we have to offer as well as the limits to that. As I have said, we are not a mediation organization, rather we would like to assist in bringing the parties to the conflict to the negotiating table, in collaboration with Sri Lankans involved in the process, and offer technical assistance to both parties.
Q: What do you mean by providing technical support and what is your experience in other countries?
KR: Often in negotiations what is very important is the establishment of the infrastructure in technical support for negotiations. Even if negotiations do not begin immediately it is important that both sides establish a task force which would go into some of the more complex subject which will be reviewed and discussed. If international Alert were to be involved in the Sri Lankan process, technical support would consist of providing documentation of peace agreements in other conflict situations such as Guatemala, EI Salvador, Angola, Sierra Leone, Mozambique and some Asian Peace Accords such as in the Philippines and similar Peace Accords in India.
Q: How active is International Alert in Sri Lanka?
KR: In Sri Lanka, IA has been trying to promote a negotiated settlement and have tried to strengthen the peace constituency in this country and also promoting in the light of other experiences a bipartisan approach.
Q: Was the issue of International Alert playing a facilitating role in the Sri Lankan conflict discussed at your recent meeting with President Chandrika Kumaratunga?
KR: It was indeed a pleasure to see the President once again and the visit was really in fact a cordial one and naturally some wide ranging issues were discussed.
Q: Was President Kumaratunga agreeable to a process of facilitation evolving within the Sri Lankan conflict with the help of International Alert?
KR: There have been many countries which have offered their good offices in mediating on the Sri Lankan conflict. It is also clear that many organizations and individuals have offered to assist in bringing this terrible conflict to an end. This strong interest reflects the overwhelming wish of the people of this country and the international community to seek an end to this horrendous conflict. It is, I think, as the Foreign Minister explained in his recent parliamentary statement, upto the government and the LTTE to decide on the modalities governing the future negotiation process. It is within IA's mandate to assist in establishing communications between all parties to the conflict. However neither the government nor the LTTE has requested such a role from International Alert so far.
Q: How wide is your experience in helping bridge other conflict situations?
KR: International Alert bridges conflict resolution research and active programmes. Thus through our research arm we are in touch with strategists and academics in many countries, including South Africa, West Asia and Bosnia. We have active programmes in Burundi, Rwanda, Liberia, Former Soviet Union and Latin America. Our training programme trains active politicians, strategists and community leaders throughout the world. So our experience is very wide.
Q: What do your active programmes consist of?
KR: Let me give you one example. We are very privileged to have had the opportunity to contribute to the success of the recent peace agreement signed between the Sierra Leone government and the Revolutionary United Front of Sierra Leone (RUF).
Sierra Leone has taken its first step towards peace and the people there are hopeful that the agreement will be implemented, with assistance from the Ivory Coast Government and International organizations, so that peace will be a reality for them very soon.
Q: Do you think there are any lessons for Sri Lanka from this experience?
KR: The Sri Lankan conflict is complex. The conflict itself goes back to the early 1980s and the roots of the conflict much further. The needs and aspirations of all of the peoples of Sri Lanka have changed during that time so it is both politically and militarily fluid and so I would mistrust any solutions put forward based simply on formulas or solely on constitutional reform. However, there is one very striking similarity between here and Sierra Leone and that is the physical isolation of the guerrilla side and the deep mistrust between the parties.
As long as there is this deep mistrust then negotiations cannot and should not begin. I say should not because if negotiations are begun without adequate preparation they will quickly fall apart and Sri Lanka will be subject to a deeper and more violent cycle of war. Therefore trust building measures should be a priority. A climate which promotes and facilitates trust building must be created by the parties, the peace movement and all politicians who aspire for peace.
Q: What steps should the government take to create trust?
KR: One of the lessons from Sierra Leone is that as long as the guerrilla movement is isolated it will not be possible to bring it into meaningful negotiation. The isolation of the North from the South of Sri Lanka may have been deemed necessary for security reasons but I do not think that anyone has counted the political cost of this. I hope that the government will at least begin to allow journalists, members of the diplomatic community and representatives of NGOs free access to the Northern areas. This will not only give an opportunity for informal meetings and contact with the LTTE leadership, but ease the beleaguered isolation of the civilian population there. However, for the civilian population the most important issue is humanitarian access and free access for food and medical supplies is crucial for any degree of trust to be established with the population.
Q: You have outlined practical steps for the government to take. What about the LTTE?
KR: Trust building is most important for the LTTE not just with the government but also with the Sinhala people. The Sinhala people who voted for peace and negotiation were badly shocked by the violent ending of the cessation of hostilities in April 1995 and their confidence needs to be restored. The LTTE has already released some prisoners as a Christmas goodwill gesture. Once it sees some answering signal from the government, I would encourage the LTTE to continue to release captives within its control. In addition both sides should begin to seek ways to de-escalate the conflict. Ceasefire will come later but they can each unilaterally decide to desist from direct antagonist attacks in the meantime. The time is also ripe for a clear and unequivocal commitment from both sides not to target civilians and for each side to be seen to enforce this in practice.
Q: What political issues will be important during this period of trust-building?
KR: The LTTE has been fighting for the recognition of self determination of the Tamil people. It has made it clear in recent times that this does not necessarily mean Eelam and it is crucially important that Tamils' right to self determination, articulated by the LTTE, is recognized by the government. On the other hand it is also important that the LTTE continues the welcome steps that it has already taken, through Diaspora conference in Norway and Australia and through direct emissaries to the government, to articulate its vision of an alternative peaceful future.
Q: What about the government's political package? Will this help to bring about a solution to the ethnic problem?
KR: The president has proposed the most far reaching constitutional reform for solving the ethnic crisis. To that extent it is to be applauded. If her constitutional reform can obtain the consensus of the major political forces in this country it will be the most outstanding contribution to a divided society. This requires both a bi-partisan approach in the South and a negotiated settlement in the North. However, as I said earlier, constitutional reform alone is insufficient. Such reform alone cannot end the war. A strong process of negotiation needs to be established within which the warring parties can agree to end the war and all interests of the Sri Lankan communities are catered for. Only by such a process can we hope to move into a sustainably peaceful period.
NDUN(L)F leader and Minister Srimani Athulathmudali is much in the news, what with asking Minister M. H. M. Ashraff not to hang onto the saree pota and think that he is the beginning and the end. Holding top portfolios such as transport, environment and women's affairs, Ms. Athulathmudali has had a stressful year, if not a year full of challenges. She tactfully skirted the question of her relationship with the President which at times has been stormy, by smiling benignly and saying, "I have no problems with her. It is the newspapers that talk of such problems. Excerpts from the interview with The Sunday Times:
Q: Is your party dismissing the devolution package in total or are you opposing some provisions of it?
A: We have never been against the devolution of the administration but what we have had stressed very strongly is that the unitary character of the state must be preserved at any cost. We have sent our views on the package to the Parliamentary Select Committee for consideration.
Q: Minister G.L. Peiris has said Lalith Athulathmudali, your husband, would have approved the devolution package. What are your comments?
A: I believe I would know a little more of Lalith's thinking as I have discussed some of these views with him. Lalith did not oppose the devolution of the administrative power but he was against the breaking up of the unitary character of our country. He was promoting a strong Sri Lankan identity.
Q: At a recent seminar on the devolution package, Dr. Peiris said that if Regional Councils abuse police powers or any other powers, the President has the authority to dissolve them under the devolution package. What are your observations on this?
A: Governance is not a game. One cannot go around saying that we will give you this but take it back if you don't know how to use it. This is why I believe that we must discuss all the pros and cons and work out something that is acceptable to everyone, not only to one ethnic group. We cannot force any thing on the people. The whole country must feel that what we are offering is something acceptable to every one and not something that a group can take over to abuse.
Q: Don't you think that the NDUN(L)F's support to the devolution package would give the Government some encouragement?
A: As much as we would like to help the government we also have to keep to our policies. The people gave us a vote because they believed in our policies. Therefore, they cannot be overlooked. That is why we gave our observations to the Select Committee.
Q: The latest from Dr. Peiris is that the President has the option open to her under the Constitution to place the devolution package before the people for their approval at a nation-wide referendum. He says the President is empowered with the requisite authority to seek the mandate of the people before seeking the approval of parliament. What have you to say?
A: This must be considered carefully. What would happen if it is a firm "no" at the referendum? Do you still come to parliament? Or if it is a "yes" at the referendum and a "no" in parliament.
Q: Do you think that the abolition of the Executive Presidency should stand by itself and it should in no way be linked with the acceptance of the devolution package?
A: We supported the PA in 1994 because of the promise of the abolition of the executive presidency. Lalith's whole campaign before he was assassinated was on the abolition of the executive presidency.
Q: You have recently crossed swords with Minister Ashraff. On what points do you disagree with his "national policy on shipping"?
A: There are certain areas in the national shipping policy that impinge on other ministries. For instance, marine environment and certain areas of transport. There are sections that come under the Ministries of Fisheries, Environment and Transport. He has to consider all this. One cannot just go rampaging. One has to discuss these issues.
Q: Is this why you said that Mr. Ashraff is thinking he is the beginning and the end?
A: When the policy paper was submitted to cabinet, observations were received, I believe, from three ministries which resulted in the forming of a cabinet sub committee. At the first meeting of this sub committee it was decided that the officials should meet to consider the observations and redraft the paper along with any observations from the National Development Council. When the next meeting was called the ministers had not received the redrafted policy paper but a document containing the observations of the ministries was attached to the paper. When I suggested to Mr. Ashraff that a redrafted policy paper should be submitted to the ministers before calling them for a meeting, he said, "This is the way I do it and I only do it my way." Hence my comment.
Q: Don't you think that the squabbles within the PA are getting intensified. What is your comment?
A: This sort of thing can always happen in any coalition. It is naturally now intensified with so many issues and problems cropping up. Coalition partners too have their own views on solving issues and problems.
Q: Won't this squabbling weaken the PA at a time when local elections are about to take place?
A: It depends on how the leadership of the party holds the lot together. It depends on the political adroitness of the leader. Her tact and capacity.
Q: Would you agree that there is too much interference with the public service?
A: I believe devolution of work must be there. Just one or two people cannot carry on the work. Different levels of people must carry on the work. Also the public servants must in turn feel that we have confidence in them for them to carry out their work without interference. We must stand by them if they do something for the long term good of the people, even though at the time it may seem unpopular.
Q: As Minister in charge of Environment you are calling for pollution-free petrol. I gather you are having some problems with this.
A: Pollution is increasing. I have asked for lead-free petrol and I have had discussions with the Petroleum Corporation in this regard. It is more expensive but in the long run we will save a lot. It is cheaper than having to clean up the air of lead pollution. But the Petroleum Corporation has told us that it is unable to produce lead-free petrol at present.
Q: Are you basing much hope on Kumar Rupesinghe, conflict resolution expert from International Alert, for a dialogue with the LTTE?
A: We can only hope for the best. Dialogue is always better than the bullet.
Q: How do you get on with the President? We often hear of heated exchanges between you and the President.
A: I have no problems with her, it is the newspapers that report such things.
Q: Do you have regrets having entered politics?
A: As I always say it was most certainly not by choice. It was thrust on me.
Q: Aren't you enjoying it nevertheless?
A: I can't say I enjoy it but the work is most certainly stimulating and I can see from where I am that a lot can be done for the country. Lalith had a vision for Sri Lanka and its people. I do what little I can to make this vision a reality.
I think of it as a sacred trust. I cannot let him down. Also I owe a great deal to his supporters who help me. My new year wish is that the conflict in the North would be over. And we as a country can live in peace and concentrate on development.
Q: A message for the women as Minister of Women's Affairs?
A: Women, I sincerely hope, will be able to find their own identity and be keenly aware of their rights. Women I hope, will go forward together with men in equal partnership for the good of the country.
Return to News/Comment Contents Page