two-year-extension-sri-lanka-meet-unhrc-obligations-will-end-unhrcs-r2p-measures-save-tamils


THE TWO YEAR EXTENSION FOR SRI LANKA TO MEET ITS UNHRC OBLIGATIONS WILL END UNHRC’s R2P MEASURES TO SAVE THE TAMILS

The Tamils facing extermination as a community in SL are no less terrified of a Sirisena, than the villainous Rajapakse who callously massacred the Tamils and successfully frustrated UNHRC’s R2P efforts to end the ruthless SL genocide.  Sirisena’s thinking does not qualify him from any leniency (including extensions) in pursuing action against him and the Rajapakses over the war and genocide crimes though frustrating UNHRC’s efforts to end the SL genocide exterminate the Tamils as a community in SL.  Sonia/UPA2 Delhi supported SL in ensuring that the massacres of Tamil civilians were successful and using its diplomatic clout to stymie UNHRC’s R2P measures especially war crimes proceedings that would have protected the Tamils from extermination.

Once the criminality in the May 2009 massacre entered the public domain Gothabhaya acted swiftly to parcel out accountability for criminality to the ‘in the loop’  eminent high powered South Blocker Indians whom were required to direct by Sonia/UPA2 to assist SL. Thus Sonia/UPA2 Delhi routinely directed the SL military offensives that caused the massacres.  The Sonia/UPA2 South Blockers treated the massacres as inconsequential though SL dreaded the massacres as war crimes that would bring in the intervention of the UNHRC and international court proceedings. To drag in the Sonia’s high powered Delhi officials’ (Narayanan/Menon) as members of the ‘in the loop’ war machine was fool hardy for Sonia/UPA2 to believe that the international community would be hesitant to act against a diplomatically powerful  Delhi and dragging Delhi into the SL’s imbroglio.  Once Gothabhaya made  his ‘in the loop’ pronouncement,   Delhi was terrified to diplomatically cave in and compromise its diplomatic clout to SL’s advantage and stymie  the work of the UNHRC and international  human rights bodies. Furthermore Delhi also seriously alienated the TN Tamils. (Ground Report 01/07/2014).

The Rajapakses believed that Mullivaykals would be effective in dissuading Eelam Tamils into abandoning their support for UNHRC’s R2P pursuits the likes of ITAK non-entities, a Sambandan or a Sumanthiran agreed to allow SL time to continue its genocide, post 2009.

Delhi’s predicament as portrayed by Shenali Waduge was for the Rajapakses and Sirisena to downplay the Mullivaykals to portray that they were not as horrible as the West made it out to be.  Delhi’s support for SL over the massacres crimes not only acted to save SL from UN criminality proceedings but also Sonia and the sectarian South Blockers.  Senile Wedge is at her best when she describes how an embarrassed Delhi besides appeasing SL to save Delhi from being embroiled in SL’s genocide,  also applauded  SL’s victory over the Elam Tamil ‘terrorists’ during most UNHRC sessions beginning from the May 2009 sessions onwards.  Delhi desired to make the Gothabhaya’s ‘in the loop’ pronouncement more palatable to Indians especially those involved especially RAW and battle hardened Indians who operated freely in the SL front lines.  The Rajapakses successfully recruited sufficient greedy, paid Indian mercenary scribes/apologists to muddle the truth that the humane NGO’s worldwide placed before the internationally community to support UNHRC’s R2P initiatives.

Shenali in the Asia Tribune of Jun 16 2009 placed before the world, SL’s authoritative account of Sonia/ UPA Delhi’s role in causing the massacres and winning over Delhi into supporting Colombo diplomatically to stymie UNHRC’s R2P initiatives.  Shenali’s story is “The Tamils staged the massive 1983 pogrom just to ‘gain residency abroad’ and Prabha ‘started as a pawn and remained a pawn’ of Indian (RAW) agents to de-stabilise, invade and compel SL into signing the Indo-SL 1987 (devolution) Accord’.  Shenali quite eerily brings the conspiracy of the western powers to ‘actually de-stabilise not SL but India as well over the Tamil cause debate...to succeed in ‘list(ing) the pawn (Prabha) ‘terrorist’. Hence thereafter according to Shenali India’s backing for SL over the war crimes at every UN/UNHRC’ sessions was to fight terrorism.  Gothabhaya in his (Sunday Times, 7 June 2009) interview described ‘a troika  ... (that) kept India ‘in the loop’ during the fighting...; ‘...acted/ created a mechanism...away from the contacts of the Foreign Ministry for ...a close relationship...between SL/Delhi officials. The trio comprised the Indian Foreign Secretary, National Security Advisor and Defence Secretary...Lurid details of the trio’s step by step liaising with their SL counterparts over the timing/details of the (May 16 to 19) massacre of the civilians/Ltte leadership were placed in the open.  RAW’s  over flights giving precise co-ordinates of the targets for massacre and according to the grape wine Narayanan/Menon  insisted that as a quid pro quo for  RAW’s involvement in the capture  of LTTE leaders  Delhi agree to treat the civilian deaths  ...(to be) politically acceptable to UPA2 Delhi /Sonia. Thus Sonia/ UPA2 Delhi recognised that the active pursuit of the SL war crimes and Delhi’s involvement in it were actions of the western powers more to damage SL and Delhi as well  diplomatically. Thus in the days immediately the May 2009 massacres Shenali and B Raman pursued this line blaming the western powers to damage both SL and Delhi blaming the massacres indeed damaging to Ion both SL and Delhi.   

Hence prudence required Delhi to stall all SL war crimes deliberations in the UN and UNHRC; denying point blank at most times that no war crimes was committed in SL implicating the South Block trio in the massacres. Most damaging to Delhi was for SL, Shenali to argue that TN acted as a ‘state within a state’ and create a Centre-TN rift politically unpalatable to Delhi.  This view point was vigorously pursued with a well timed UPA2 Menon’s ‘national question’ thinking to  ...marginalise the Tamil cause thinking. Delhi no longer gives much weight to the TN factor ... (and the South Block’s triumph is in cutting TN out of the debate on the Tamil issue). This constituted an offensive,   betrayal by Delhi of TN, irrevocably alienating mainstream Tamils in TN and ‘sadly creating a de facto write-off state within the so-called Indian Union’ (Shenali) .

THE TWO YEAR EXTENSION FOR SRI LANKA TO MEET ITS UNHRC OBLIGATIONS WILL END UNHRC’s R2P MEASURES TO SAVE THE TAMILS
The Tamils facing extermination as a community in SL are no less terrified of a Sirisena, than the villainous Rajapakse who callously massacred the Tamils and successfully frustrated UNHRC’s R2P efforts to end the ruthless SL genocide.  Sirisena’s thinking does not qualify him from any leniency (including extensions) in pursuing action against him and the Rajapakses over the war and genocide crimes though frustrating UNHRC’s efforts to end the SL genocide exterminate the Tamils as a community in SL.  Sonia/UPA2 Delhi supported SL in ensuring that the massacres of Tamil civilians were successful and using its diplomatic clout to stymie UNHRC’s R2P measures especially war crimes proceedings that would have protected the Tamils from extermination.
Once the criminality in the May 2009 massacre entered the public domain Gothabhaya acted swiftly to parcel out accountability for criminality to the ‘in the loop’  eminent high powered South Blocker Indians whom were required to direct by Sonia/UPA2 to assist SL. Thus Sonia/UPA2 Delhi routinely directed the SL military offensives that caused the massacres.  The Sonia/UPA2 South Blockers treated the massacres as inconsequential though SL dreaded the massacres as war crimes that would bring in the intervention of the UNHRC and international court proceedings. To drag in the Sonia’s high powered Delhi officials’ (Narayanan/Menon) as members of the ‘in the loop’ war machine was fool hardy for Sonia/UPA2 to believe that the international community would be hesitant to act against a diplomatically powerful  Delhi and dragging Delhi into the SL’s imbroglio.  Once Gothabhaya made  his ‘in the loop’ pronouncement,   Delhi was terrified to diplomatically cave in and compromise its diplomatic clout to SL’s advantage and stymie  the work of the UNHRC and international  human rights bodies. Furthermore Delhi also seriously alienated the TN Tamils. (Ground Report 01/07/2014).
The Rajapakses believed that Mullivaykals would be effective in dissuading Eelam Tamils into abandoning their support for UNHRC’s R2P pursuits the likes of ITAK non-entities, a Sambandan or a Sumanthiran agreed to allow SL time to continue its genocide, post 2009.
Delhi’s predicament as portrayed by Shenali Waduge was for the Rajapakses and Sirisena to downplay the Mullivaykals to portray that they were not as horrible as the West made it out to be.  Delhi’s support for SL over the massacres crimes not only acted to save SL from UN criminality proceedings but also Sonia and the sectarian South Blockers.  Senile Wedge is at her best when she describes how an embarrassed Delhi besides appeasing SL to save Delhi from being embroiled in SL’s genocide,  also applauded  SL’s victory over the Elam Tamil ‘terrorists’ during most UNHRC sessions beginning from the May 2009 sessions onwards.  Delhi desired to make the Gothabhaya’s ‘in the loop’ pronouncement more palatable to Indians especially those involved especially RAW and battle hardened Indians who operated freely in the SL front lines.  The Rajapakses successfully recruited sufficient greedy, paid Indian mercenary scribes/apologists to muddle the truth that the humane NGO’s worldwide placed before the internationally community to support UNHRC’s R2P initiatives.
Shenali in the Asia Tribune of Jun 16 2009 placed before the world, SL’s authoritative account of Sonia/ UPA Delhi’s role in causing the massacres and winning over Delhi into supporting Colombo diplomatically to stymie UNHRC’s R2P initiatives.  Shenali’s story is “The Tamils staged the massive 1983 pogrom just to ‘gain residency abroad’ and Prabha ‘started as a pawn and remained a pawn’ of Indian (RAW) agents to de-stabilise, invade and compel SL into signing the Indo-SL 1987 (devolution) Accord’.  Shenali quite eerily brings the conspiracy of the western powers to ‘actually de-stabilise not SL but India as well over the Tamil cause debate...to succeed in ‘list(ing) the pawn (Prabha) ‘terrorist’. Hence thereafter according to Shenali India’s backing for SL over the war crimes at every UN/UNHRC’ sessions was to fight terrorism.  Gothabhaya in his (Sunday Times, 7 June 2009) interview described ‘a troika  ... (that) kept India ‘in the loop’ during the fighting...; ‘...acted/ created a mechanism...away from the contacts of the Foreign Ministry for ...a close relationship...between SL/Delhi officials. The trio comprised the Indian Foreign Secretary, National Security Advisor and Defence Secretary...Lurid details of the trio’s step by step liaising with their SL counterparts over the timing/details of the (May 16 to 19) massacre of the civilians/Ltte leadership were placed in the open.  RAW’s  over flights giving precise co-ordinates of the targets for massacre and according to the grape wine Narayanan/Menon  insisted that as a quid pro quo for  RAW’s involvement in the capture  of LTTE leaders  Delhi agree to treat the civilian deaths  ...(to be) politically acceptable to UPA2 Delhi /Sonia. Thus Sonia/ UPA2 Delhi recognised that the active pursuit of the SL war crimes and Delhi’s involvement in it were actions of the western powers more to damage SL and Delhi as well  diplomatically. Thus in the days immediately the May 2009 massacres Shenali and B Raman pursued this line blaming the western powers to damage both SL and Delhi blaming the massacres indeed damaging to Ion both SL and Delhi.   
Hence prudence required Delhi to stall all SL war crimes deliberations in the UN and UNHRC; denying point blank at most times that no war crimes was committed in SL implicating the South Block trio in the massacres. Most damaging to Delhi was for SL, Shenali to argue that TN acted as a ‘state within a state’ and create a Centre-TN rift politically unpalatable to Delhi.  This view point was vigorously pursued with a well timed UPA2 Menon’s ‘national question’ thinking to  ...marginalise the Tamil cause thinking. Delhi no longer gives much weight to the TN factor ... (and the South Block’s triumph is in cutting TN out of the debate on the Tamil issue). This constituted an offensive,   betrayal by Delhi of TN, irrevocably alienating mainstream Tamils in TN and ‘sadly creating a de facto write-off state within the so-called Indian Union’ (Shenali) .
Shree Modi unwittingly continued with the foolhardy Sonia/UPA2 line allowing MEA during discussions in UNHRC sessions.   Though NDA/Delhi BJP/Modi was elected on its ‘India first’ policy it was compelled by MEA South Blockers to abandon Centre’s support for TN and its Tamil cause,  when there were no compelling causes for Modi/NDA also hurtfully treat TN as a de facto write off state in the Indian Union.  NDA/BJP with an otherwise clean record allowed the continuation of Sonia/UPA2 South Blocker’s support for SL during the UNHRC proceedings to continue to embarrass NDA/BJP/Modi as well. The secret understanding between the NDA/BJP Sushma Swaraj and UPA2 Sonia’s support SL no longer justified Modi/ BJP Delhi continuing support for the condemnable and criminal stance of SL’s anti-Tamil thinking even today.  Should not BJP re-think, whether TN needs to be treated  as a ‘write-off state’ virtually accepting Shenali/SL’s insinuation to complain about the continuation of the Delhi/TN/Tamil alienation and instead  working towards appeasing TN and the Tamils on moral and 'India First' grounds?
(MUCH OF THE MATERIAL FOR THE ABOVE BLOG WAS EXTRACTED FROM THIS AUTHOR’S BLOG POST, TITLED ‘WOULD MODI ALLOW THE SONIA/UPA ...

Comments