Disclaimer: This site has been first put up 15 years ago. Since then I would probably do a couple things differently, but because I've noticed this site had been linked from news outlets, PhD theses and peer rewieved papers and because I really hate the concept of "digital dark age" I've decided to put it back up. There's no chance it can produce any harm now.
| Identifier: | 02COLOMBO2174 |
|---|---|
| Wikileaks: | View 02COLOMBO2174 at Wikileaks.org |
| Origin: | Embassy Colombo |
| Created: | 2002-11-20 14:02:00 |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL |
| Tags: | PREL PGOV PTER EAID CE NO LTTE |
| Redacted: | This cable was not redacted by Wikileaks. |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 COLOMBO 002174 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR SA, SA/INS; NSC FOR E. MILLARD LONDON FOR POL/RIEDEL E.O. 12958: DECL: 11-21-02 TAGS: PREL, PGOV, PTER, EAID, CE, NO, LTTE - Peace Process SUBJECT: High hopes for Oslo conference, as Sri Lankans welcome international focus on peace effort Refs: (A) FBIS Reston Va DTG 201402Z Nov 02 - (B) Colombo 2160, and previous (U) Classified by Ambassador E. Ashley Wills. Reasons 1.5 (b, d). 1. (C) SUMMARY: Expectations in Sri Lanka are running high for the November 25 Oslo conference. Observers see the conference as a chance for the international community to send a strong signal of support for the peace effort. Amid this focus on a political message, expectations have been lowered that the conference is going to rake in big pledges for Sri Lanka. Slicing against the grain, a small, vocal minority is fiercely critical of the conference, seeing it as a boon for the LTTE. After years of brutal war, the conference is a vital moment for Sri Lanka as it tries to re-enter the international mainstream. END SUMMARY. -------------------------- Seeking a Political Signal -------------------------- 2. (C) The "Sri Lanka Peace Process Support Meeting" scheduled for November 25 in Oslo is garnering lots of buzz in Sri Lanka. Most Sri Lankans have high expectations for the conference. Taking a cue from the GSL (see below), observers primarily see the conference as a chance for the international community to send a strong political signal of support for the GSL- Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) peace effort. In various recent conversations, Mission has picked up the following perspectives: -- Kedish Loganathan of the Center for Policy Alternatives, a well-known local think-tank, told us that the conference placed a bright spotlight on Sri Lanka and its problems. Sri Lankans want a "political signal" to emerge from the conference highlighting international support for the peace process. -- Gajan Ponnambalam, a Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP, told us that it was "a very good development to see the GSL and the LTTE sitting down together with the international community. It reflects how seriously the international community views the peace process and also the sincerity of its commitment to helping Sri Lanka." -- Godfrey Gunatilleke, the Director of the Marga Institute, a think-tank, remarked: "The Oslo international forum focused on peace is very welcome. Looking for support from the international community is a positive step and will help set the peace process in concrete." ---------------------- Less Focus on Pledging ---------------------- 3. (C) Amid the focus on a political message, expectations have been lowered that the conference is going to rake in big pledges for Sri Lanka. Initially, the government had tried to sell the conference mainly as a way for the country to pick up funding support for humanitarian/reconstruction projects. In fact, against the backdrop of complaints that the GSL was not focusing enough on bread-and-butter issues, the government had seemed to indicate that the conference was a way for Sri Lanka to help revive its economy. Perhaps because a follow-on conference is scheduled to take place next year in Japan with pledging as the main focus in any case, the government is now lowballing the possibility of large sums being raised at Oslo. G.L. Peiris, a senior minister involved in peace process issues, made this point in remarks at a press conference the other day, stating: "We are not hoping for astronomical sums of money. What is important is not the magnitude of resources -- the absorptive capacity is limited. What we expect most out of the Oslo conference is a very strong, unequivocal message of support and solidarity for the peace process." 4. (SBU) (((Note: In line with the apparent shift in emphasis from pledging to a more politically-focused message, there has been a corresponding shift in the way the Oslo conference is referred to: it had been called a "donors' conference," but now is formally entitled "Sri Lanka Peace Process Support Meeting."))) --------------------- Small Band of Critics --------------------- 5. (SBU) Slicing against the grain, a small, vocal minority is fiercely critical of the conference, seeing it as wrong for the LTTE to be present. This view was exemplified in an editorial in "The Island," an English- language paper, on November 21. This editorial -- which was placed on the front-page, a rare occurrence -- essentially echoed themes from previous "Island" editorials (see Ref B), but in harsher tones. The main point was that the international community was way out of line in allowing the LTTE, a terrorist organization, to participate in Oslo. The U.S. was specifically signaled out for censure. Choicer bits of the editorial included: -- "The most saddening development of all will be that the mighty democracies of the world, the stout defenders of human rights, are likely to sit down for talks with (the LTTE), despite they themselves having specifically declared the LTTE a terrorist organization." -- "The LTTE falls well into the category of international terrorist organizations specified by UN resolutions, in addition to being proscribed in the U.S., Canada, Australia, Britain, and India. Can they disregard their own anti-terrorist laws and UN anti- terrorist resolutions in such a cavalier manner because it suits their objectives?" -- "Anti-terrorist laws clearly spell out there can be no negotiations, direct or indirect, with terrorist organizations. In law, those nations (participating in Oslo) can only talk to the Sri Lankan government." 6. (C) This type of criticism does not seem to be reverberating on the streets. As far as Mission is aware, there have been no demonstrations against the Oslo conference. Representatives of President Kumaratunga's party, the People's Alliance (PA), and the radical Janantha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), have hit out at the Oslo conference in various speeches, however. The PA even went so far as to issue a long public statement late last week criticizing the GSL's handling of the peace process and Norway's facilitation effort. The statement also raised some questions about the LTTE's participation in the conference -- See Ref B. ------- COMMENT ------- 7. (C) After years of brutal war, the conference is a big moment for Sri Lanka as it tries to re-enter the international mainstream. The fact that key states -- most especially the U.S. -- are sitting down to underscore support for Sri Lanka and its peace process is considered very important here. We expect that the conference will receive significant press coverage and be a feather in the government's cap. There will continue to be some dissonance from some quarters on the issue of the LTTE's participation, but the conference should accomplish its key purpose, i.e., strengthening Sri Lanka's peace process. END COMMENT. 8. (U) Minimize considered. WILLS
Latest source of this page is cablebrowser-2, released 2011-10-04