| Al Jazeera,April 23, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||
The UN Security Council has demanded that Tamil separatists holding out against the Sri Lankan military surrender and allow civilians trapped in the war zone to leave. Wednesday’s call by Claude Heller, the council’s rotating president, came as rights groups pressed the UN to do more, warning that tens of thousands of civilians remain stuck in “catastrophic” conditions. Heller said: “We demand that the LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] immediately lay down arms, renounce terrorism, allow a UN-assisted evacuation of the remaining civilians in the conflict area, and join the political process.” ‘Human shields’ Diplomats told reporters after the closed session that the security council “strongly condemned” the Tigers and accused them of using civilians trapped in a small strip of land as human shields.
The security council also expressed its “deep concern” about the worsening humanitarian situation, but so far has not taken any action. Rights groups are calling for a two-week ceasefire to let civilians out. Anna Neistat, of Human Rights Watch, said: “We do have numerous civilian casualties, but we are not yet at the stage where a Tamilloodbath is going on full scale. It is a matter of days if not hours.” The Sri Lankan military says it has “rescued” 80,000 Tamils over the past three days. The government ordered the Tigers to surrender on Tuesday, saying the military was about to start its final assault. Catherine Bragg, the UN deputy humanitarian affairs chief, said the UN had not yet received permission to enter the conflict zone or to monitor the screening of civilians who manage to escape the fighting, a claim disputed by the Sri Lankan government. The Sri Lankan government was also criticised for not providing full assistance to all civilians fleeing the Tiger-held zone. ‘Human sandbags’ David Chater, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in the northeastern Trincomalee, said: “[The government] sfay that it is the Tamil Tigers who are holding the Tamil civilians there, using civilians as human sandbags. I’ve certainly talked to many people and they’ve told me that is correct.
“I think perhaps the Sri Lankan government could be held responsible for some of the injuries if they are being caused by indirect fire – that is shelling, bombing, mortars,” he said.”But they made it very clear to me that they say they are using minimum force, these are their fellow civilians they do not want to harm them, their target is the Tamil Tigers.” Chater said that many of the refugees said that they were bitter about the way the LTTE had treated them. “There seems to have been a sea change in the opinion of the Tamil civilians about the Tamil Tiger leadership. “[After] seeing the men that were supposed to be protecting them, fighting for their own homeland, exploiting them, shooting at them when they tried to escape, stealing the humanitarian food supplies. Chater said that this that has had eroded support for the LTTE which could hamper any guerrilla force operating after the conventional military war is over. Susan Rice, the US ambassador, suggested that both sides might be guilty of violating international law. “The fact that both sides have been shooting at civilians as they leave the safe zone is one gross manifestation of the apparent violation of international humanitarian law,” she said. In remarks to the US congress on Wednesday, Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, said “the Sri Lankan government knows that the entire world is very disappointed” at the “untold suffering” being brought by its offensive against the Tigers”. She added that “there seems to be very little openness on the part of the Tamil Tiger leadership to cease their efforts so that we could try to get in and help the people”. Prominent Tigers ‘surrender’ China and Russia are among some countries which have opposed the idea of a formal security council discussion of the conflict, which has spanned 26 years, saying it is an internal matter for the Sri Lankans.
The UN estimates that more than 4,500 civilians have been killed in the past three months and the International Committee of the Red Cross says up to 50,000 people remain trapped in the less than 20sq km area still held by the Tigers.The Sri Lankan military said on Thursday that the group’s former media spokesman and an interpreter who both played prominent roles in dealing with the media, had surrendered. The Tigers have been fighting for an autonomous homeland for ethnic Tamils in the north of the country, arguing that they are marginalised by the majority Sinhalese government. A Norway-brokered ceasefire fell apart during 2007 and the government said it would “wipe out” the Tigers by the end of 2008. |
Posts Tagged ‘UN Security Council’
UN urges Tamil Tigers to surrender
April 23, 2009
Silence on Sri Lanka
April 15, 2009Morning Star Online, April 14, 2009
Printable
EmailThe lack of news coverage on Sri Lanka has been absolutely extraordinary. The war has been going on since 1983. It has resulted in the deaths of thousands of people in the north and east of Sri Lanka, where Tamils have suffered at the hands of the army, and in attacks on the capital Colombo and elsewhere.
It has also damaged civil liberties in Sri Lanka, leading to the deaths of a number of politicians and the disappearance of journalists.
Last Saturday saw an enormous demonstration in London which, with the honourable exception of the Morning Star, many papers simply refused to cover at all – despite the fact that well over 200,000 people were present, overwhelmingly from the Tamil diaspora.
The protesters have also occupied Parliament Square and two of them have been on hunger strike in order to force the pace of British demands for a ceasefire.
The British government has appointed ex-defence secretary Des Browne as its peace envoy, but even his appointment has been rejected by the Sri Lankan government. Norway, which has played a positive role in the past and once negotiated a ceasefire, has been told that it can no longer speak to the Sri Lankan government.
The rally on Saturday demanded an immediate and unconditional ceasefire as a prelude to negotiations. The Sri Lankan government has announced a two-day new year ceasefire, but couched its announcement in terms of allowing civilians to leave the enclave at Varina rather than as part of a longer-term peace process.
The Sri Lankan government has pursued the war with incredible intensity and ferocity over the past few months, with ominous reports of civilian targets being bombed and the use of illegal weapons.
The UN security council found itself able to meet at a few hours notice after North Korea launched a rocket which was apparently a mechanism to put a satellite into orbit. The launch killed no-one, no-one was injured and no country was attacked.
But the continuous death toll in Sri Lanka has so far not yet warranted a special meeting of the security council, although one is now apparently to be scheduled.
Sri Lanka is well armed with weapons purchased from all over the world and its economy has been buoyed in recent years by huge tourist income, despite a raging war a few hundred miles away from the Europeans sunning themselves on the beaches.
The war in Sri Lanka is in effect a legacy of the British colonial period and while the Sri Lankan army clearly has succeeded in reducing the military capability of the Tamil Tigers, it has not solved the basic cause of the problem or put forward any strategy for doing so.
The very least that Britain can do is halt tourism and any strategic weapons supplies to Sri Lanka and assist in promoting talks and recognition of the Tamil people.
It’s tragic that the Tamil people should turn out in such huge numbers in London last week but very few others seem willing or able to show their support.
Editorials: Gaza: Welcome initiative by ICC
February 3, 2009Arab News, Feb 3, 2009
The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague is wisely reconsidering its decision last month that it was unable to mount a war crimes prosecution over Israeli savagery in Gaza because it did not have jurisdiction. Israel along with the United States (as well as China, Russia and India) does not recognize the ICC. Therefore it was initially argued that procedurally a case could not be brought against named Israeli soldiers and politicians. Yesterday the ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo revealed that he was investigating the possibility that because the “alleged” war crimes were committed on Palestinian territory and the Palestinian Authority had requested a prosecution, it was after all possible to bring a case. The UN is separately investigating the shelling of its Gaza schools. This change of heart may have come about because of a belated recognition of international outrage at the shelling of the Gaza ghetto, causing thousands of deaths and injuries among a totally trapped civilian population. There is also clear evidence that the Israelis used phosphorus munitions in dense built-up areas, which is an offense under the Geneva Conventions.
The ICC is still a fledgling international court. If it embarks on a prosecution of Israeli war criminals, it can expect to be heading on a collision course, almost certainly with Washington and very probably with a number of European capitals, whose governments busily condemned the barbarous onslaught but, as with the 2007 Israeli invasion of southern Lebanon, did precious little to try and stop it.
The reason why the ICC must bring a case against Israel is that it is time the court was seen to be prepared to prosecute any one from any country, without fear or favor. So far the ICC has acted over allegations involving developing countries such as Chad and Senegal, Sierra Leone and Rwanda. It has not challenged a modern state like Israel. Most certainly it should. It cannot afford to have the watching world believe that there is one law for poor, unsophisticated countries and another for advanced states enjoying US backing and protection. A war crime is just as heinous when committed by a modern, well-equipped and allegedly disciplined army as it is by fanatics with machetes in the African jungle. Israel’s wrongdoing is compounded in that the butchery of helpless Palestinians was clearly an obnoxious political ploy to try and save the Kadima-led Israeli coalition from defeat at the next week’s general election.
If the ICC does accept the Palestinian complaint and the Israelis refuse to cooperate, as has the Sudanese government over war crimes allegations in Darfur, it does not mean that the case falls. With Sudan the matter was referred to the UN Security Council, who though stopping short of accusing Sudan of genocide, as Washington had wished, condemned the government of President Omar Bashir. To the African Union’s concern, the ICC is now considering if the first international arrest warrant should be issued for a sitting head of state. The court should be no less robust in its early investigation of Israel’s abhorrent behavior in Gaza. War crimes do not cease to be war crimes just because they were committed by the victims of the Holocaust or their descendants.
Bad news from neighborhood
THE news that Israel has invested close to NIS 200 million in Mevasseret Adumim, a new Jewish neighborhood east of Jerusalem where 3,500 housing units are slated to be built, reveals the real intentions of the outgoing government, said the Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
U.N. Diplomats Frustrated at Gaza Impasse
January 6, 2009By Haider Rizvi | Inter Press Service
UNITED NATIONS, Jan 5 (IPS) – Disappointed with the Security Council’s inaction regarding the worsening situation in Gaza, diplomats from numerous nations of the global South are close to taking the case of Israeli aggression to the U.N. General Assembly.
“It seems like they will wait for another day or two about what happens at the Security Council. If the Council does not take any action, they will be going to the General Assembly soon,” a diplomatic source told IPS on condition of anonymity.
U.N. and Gaza health officials have reported more than 550 Palestinian dead and around 2,500 wounded since the offensive began on Dec. 27.
Countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, Iran and Venezuela are in favour of asking the 192-member General Assembly to adopt a resolution deploring Israeli killing of civilians and calling for an immediate ceasefire, the source said.
However, the source added that some Arab countries and others are expressing reservations about such a move.
Unlike the Security Council, the U.N. General Assembly does not have the power to implement its resolutions by force. But its verdict on international issues of war and peace is considered as important because it is based on majority vote on an equal basis.
In a statement Monday, the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), which enjoys a solid majority in the General Assembly, said it was deeply disappointed at the “inability of the Security Council to uphold its responsibilities in maintaining international peace and security.”
The 118-member group of developing nations called for Israel to end the “collective punishment” of the Palestinians, and abide by all its obligations as the occupying power under international law and relevant U.N. resolutions and that it does so “unconditionally”.
That demand is not acceptable to Israel’s closest ally, the United States, which enjoys veto power in the 15-member Security Council. On Saturday, the U.S. blocked a Council presidential statement calling for an immediate ceasefire by both sides.
“We want this thing to end,” argued the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Zalmay Khalilzad, before informal Security Council consultations started Monday evening. “But [first] practical engagements that are workable and durable have to be made.”
When pressed by a journalist to explain what he really meant by the term “practical arrangements”, the U.S. envoy responded with an air of vagueness: “Ceasefire that deals with both the rockets and [the Israeli military action].”
“We want an arrangement that can endure,” he said, adding that his country was against an unconditional ceasefire because it feared that Hamas would use it to rearm itself as Hezbollah did in Lebanon in 2006.
Conversations with a number of diplomatic observers suggest the U.S. is not going to change its stance before the new administration takes charge in Washington, and that until then, the Israelis would continue their military operation Gaza.
Describing the situation as “alarming”, the U.N. chief for humanitarian operations, John Holmes, said Monday that civilian casualties were steadily rising as Israeli ground operations have now intensified with ongoing aerial bombing.
“We look urgently for a ceasefire,” he told reporters. “We don’t know the exact number of casualties. The reports say they are over 500. The casualties are rising. Hospitals are struggling with growing casualties. Power is lacking.”
The U.N. relief agency UNRWA’s John Ging called the situation in Gaza “a shocking state of affairs”. In a teleconference, Ging, who entered Gaza Monday, said: “The streets are empty. It’s really horrible. People are terrorised and terrified. There is nowhere to flee.”
Holmes said he had repeatedly called for ceasefire on humanitarian grounds but “I don’t see any response to my appeal.” The U.N. official said the aid crisis in Gaza was worsening day by day.
Facing the possibility of a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann has repeatedly called for a ceasefire while terming the deadly Israeli attacks a “monstrosity”.
On Monday, his spokesperson, Enrique Yeves, strongly criticised the Council for its failure to adopt a statement. “This organisation was established to establish peace,” he said, adding that contrary to the hopes of many, it failed to stop “the massacre in Gaza”.
“Why the Council is not making decisions? Why the people are dying every day?” he asked at a briefing.
On Monday, Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the 22-member Arab League, called the Israeli actions in Gaza “naked aggression” and demanded an immediate halt to military operations in the occupied territory.
“We want the Council to act decisively and swiftly,” he told reporters before attending a meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and several Arab foreign ministers at U.N. headquarters.
For his part, Ban expressed cautious optimism about the outcome of the meeting.
“We have agreed to work very closely so that the Security Council can take decisive and swift and credible action for a binding resolution,” he said. “We will continue to work closely in the coming days with the Council and other key leaders in the region.”
Ban said he was going to Washington Tuesday to discuss the current phase of the Middle East crisis with President George W. Bush, whose term expires in two weeks. When asked what he was going to tell Bush, Ban said: “I am going to stress that this situation should come to an end and [that] the civilian population should be fully protected.”
While Ban flies to Washington Tuesday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is due to arrive at U.N. headquarters in New York.
Experts on conflict resolution and human rights law say it is a must that the Security Council takes a firm and immediate action to stop the killing of civilians in Gaza. In this context, they are recommending a number of practical measures.
“The Council can start by a strong resolution condemning attacks by civilians on both Israel and [the Palestinian militant group] Hamas, demanding that such acts cease immediately,” said the London-based Amnesty International’s Malcolm Smart.
In a statement, Amnesty said it wants the Council to urge Israel to lift restrictions on the passage of humanitarian aid to Gaza and allow aid workers and journalists to have unhindered access to the occupied territories under attack.
Experts at the International Crisis Group (ICG) have also suggested similar measures and more.
“Third parties viewed as credible and trustworthy by both parties must push to end this before the toll escalates or before Israel’s land incursions turn into a venture of uncertain scope, undetermined consequences and all too familiar human cost,” said ICG’s Robert Belcher.
In Belcher’s view, Israel might win militarily and even topple Hamas, “but with clear exit and day-after scenario, a discredited Palestinian Authority and debilitated peace process, it might not be a political win.”
“There are signs important actors — European in particular, the U.S. far less so — have learned from the experience of the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war that time is of the essence,” he said. “It’s not clear whether this bitter lesson will translate into quicker action.”
“But,” according to the ICG analyst, “devising a ceasefire acceptable to both sides is not beyond reach.”
At the moment, no one really knows if such suggestions are going to work or not.
Powell Lies About Iraq War after Endorsing Obama
October 22, 2008By Matthew Rothschild | RINF.COM, Oct 21, 2008
Save your praise of Colin Powell.
Because while he was endorsing Barack Obama, he was busy rewriting the history of the Iraq War and perpetuating blatant lies about his role and George Bush’s role in the lead-up.
At a press conference after his appearance on Meet the Press Sunday, Powell responded to a question about his involvement in the decisions around the Iraq War.
http://www.cnn.com (starts at about 2:48)
Here was his answer: “My role has been very, very straightforward,” he said. “I wanted to avoid a war. The President agreed with me. We tried to do that and couldn’t get it to the U.N.”
There are at least four falsehoods in that little passage.
First, Powell’s role wasn’t very straightforward. While he did initially oppose the war, his deceitful testimony at the U.N. on February 5, 2003, prepared the battlefield for war.
Second, Bush never agreed with Powell about the need to avoid the war but was always fast peddling toward war.
Third, Bush and Powell did not go to the U.N. to try to avoid war. They went there to get the Security Council to greenlight the war.
And finally, what they couldn’t get through the U.N. Security Council was not an effort to avoid the war. A majority on the Security Council was begging for more time for the weapons inspectors, who had found nothing, to continue to do their work.
It was the U.N. that wanted to avoid war. It was Bush and Powell who were in a hurry to start the war.
Powell may be getting heaps of praise from the liberal punditocracy for breaking with his party on Obama. But he has not broken with his party on the Iraq War. In fact, he’s still trying to cover up Bush’s and his own shameful acts that precipitated the war.
We lie and bluster about our nukes – and then wag our fingers at Iran
August 3, 2008By failing to disarm and breaking the rules when it suits, nuclear states are driving proliferation as much as Ahmadinejad
-
-
- The Guardian, Tuesday July 29 2008
What is the Iranian government up to? For once the imperial coalition, overstretched in Iraq and unpopular at home, is proposing jaw, not war. The UN security council’s offer was a good one: if Iran suspended its uranium enrichment programme, it would be entitled to legally guaranteed supplies of fuel for nuclear power, assistance in building a light water reactor, foreign aid, technology transfer and the beginning of the end of economic sanctions. The US seems prepared, for the first time since the revolution, to open a diplomatic office in Tehran. But in Geneva, 10 days ago, the Iranians filibustered until the negotiations ended. On Saturday President Ahmadinejad announced that Iran has now doubled the number of centrifuges it uses to enrich uranium. A fourth round of sanctions looks inevitable.
The unequivocal statements Barack Obama and Gordon Brown made in Israel last week about Iran’s nuclear weapons programme cannot yet be justified. Nor can the unequivocal statements by some anti-war campaigners that Iran does not intend to build the bomb. Why would a country with such reserves of natural gas and so great a potential for solar power suffer sanctions and the threat of bombing to make fuel it could buy from other states, if it accepted the UN’s terms?
Those who maintain that Iran’s purposes are peaceful clutch at the National Intelligence Estimate published by the US government in November. While it judged that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003, it saw the country’s civilian uranium programme as a means of developing “technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so”. The latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency notes that no fissile material has been diverted from Iran’s stocks, but raises grave questions about some of the documents it has found, which suggest research into bomb-making (Iran says the papers are forgeries). Those of us who oppose an attack on Iran are under no obligation to accept Ahmadinejad’s claims of peaceful intent.
Peace and Justice Post 
UN Security Council ignores request to discuss killing in Sri Lanka
May 12, 2009M & C.com, South Asia News,
May 11, 2009, 19:44 GMT
New York – Top diplomats from Britain and France were rebuffed on Monday when some UN Security Council members refused their request to discuss the fighting in Sri Lanka, which killed more than 400 people during the past weekend.
The council members that opposed taking up the issue were not named publicly.
Foreign Ministers David Miliband of Britain and Bernard Kouchner of France were also joined by Austria’s Michael Spindelegger, the federal minister for European and international affairs, to protest inaction by the 15-nation council at UN headquarters in New York.
‘We are more than shocked, we cannot support the way in this particular place while people are suffering and dying,’ Kouchner told reporters, showing his indignation.
When asked which council members opposed their request, Miliband said, ‘We can only speak for ourselves. Others can speak for themselves.’
‘We are clear, this is an issue that the UN Security Council should address, it involves major civilian loss of lives and distress,’ Miliband said. ‘It does have ramifications for the region. We as European members of the UN Security Council, we believe that the issues belong here.’
Both Miliband and Kouchner said they were ready to tell council members ‘what they have seen’ in Sri Lanka, but apparently they were not allowed to.
As a rule and unless a crisis is already on the council’s agenda, a majority of nine council members have to approve a new issue be put on the agenda of discussion. Some council members have opposed discussion over matters they consider domestic matters.
China in the past opposed discussion of Myanmar’s political crisis and Russia opposed discussion of Chechnya, where armed opposition was fighting Russian troops for independence.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Monday urged warring parties in Sri Lanka to respect international humanitarian efforts protecting civilians following reports of the weekend massacre of over 400 civilians.
‘Thousands of Sri Lankans have already died in the past several months due to the conflict, and more still remain in grave danger,’ Ban said, adding that he was appalled at the killing.
‘The reckless disrespect shown by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) for the safety of civilians has led to thousands of people remaining trapped in the area,’ Ban said.
In Colombo, the UN said more than 400 people were killed and more than 1,200 injured in the fighting over the weekend and the government and rebels accused each other of the killing in a narrow land strip near the coast of the Mullaitivu district, 395 kilometres north-east of the capital.
‘We can call it a bloodbath,’ UN spokesman in Colombo Gordon Weiss told German Press Agency dpa.
He explained that although he had no confirmation of who was responsible for the killings, both parties were responsible for the well-being of civilians caught in the conflict.
Read more: “UN Security Council ignores request to discuss killing in Sri Lanka – Monsters and Critics” – http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/southasia/news/article_1476489.php/UN_Security_Council_ignores_request_to_discuss_killing_in_Sri_Lanka_#ixzz0FHSMFhF4&A
Share this:
Tags:a blood bath, Bernard Kouchner of France, David Miliband of Britain, killings in Sri Lanka, Michael Spindelegger of Austria, prtest by three foreign ministers, Sri Lanka, UN Security Council
Posted in Commentary, crime, Human rights, Sri Lanka, warmongers | Leave a Comment »