Most Tamils I know outside this country do not support a separate State. They are not separatists, and they are not Terrorists.

By Jean-Pierre Page –

Colloquium –  Issues of Truth and Accountability; Narration III; The Last Stage of the War in Sri Lanka

I would like to share with you a few ideas in relation to the 3rd narrative of the last stage of the war in Sri Lanka.

I will try to make myself as clear as possible!

I don’t believe in this notion that it is the influence of the Tamil Diaspora that determines Washington’s foreign policy and that of its Western allies! And I think it is very wrong and dangerous to put all the Tamil Diaspora in one basket. Most Tamils I know outside this country do not support a separate State. They are not separatists, and they are not Terrorists.

Mahinda-Obama

Of course, the Tamil separatist forces outside do have relations with Washington and its allies, but these relations are determined by the national and geostrategic objectives of the US and its allies, as we have seen in Afghanistan, or now in Iraq, Syria and the Ukraine. For the West, when it suits their objectives, they are good Tamil Tigers and when it doesn’t, they are bad Tamil Tigers, like the good jihadists and bad Jihadists. It all depends on the circumstances. Today, the LTTE has been defeated, but tomorrow it can become useful again!

That is why I find most of the political comments and reflections in Sri Lanka very introspective. They are not concrete observations of the reality.

1– When I speak of reality, I mean today’s global reality, with its tensions, its geopolitical, economic, security and military challenges. How can we speak of a third narrative on the last period of the war without taking into account the reality of the world, its balance of forces as it was then, and as it is today?

Once a very senior French Ambassador told me in Beijing, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union: “to understand the meaning of international and diplomatic relations, you must look at a map and understand the relation between geography and strategy.” He was quite right. Years later, when I read Zbignew Brejinski’s book “ The Grand Chessboard,” where he affirms “we must always fear Russia, even a capitalist Russia, and an anti hegemonic alliance between China, Russia and India,“ I understood even better what this very senior French Ambassador had meant.

Therefore, if you look at a map of today’s global chessboard, characterized by the strategy of encirclement to roll back the space of Russia, China, India, or when you see where the conflicts are taking place, or where NATO’s ballistic defense system is placed and the disposition of US and NATO forces in this region, especially naval forces, you will understand why the war in Sri Lanka lasted 30 years and why today the US needs to get a foothold here! That’s why they need a regime change, and they can do it with or without sections of the Tamil diaspora. But, regime change is not their finality, but only a means to facilitate their global objectives.

I think, if a narrative is to make any sense, we must take a closer look at this fundamental aspect of the international situation and how it has influenced the conflict in Sri Lanka!

To understand the international aspects of what has happened and what is happening now in Sri Lanka, we must understand the UN as a reflection of this global reality. In fact, the UN, which is a multilateral system and belongs to all of us, is totally dependent and manipulated by civil society mercenaries that are financed by the US and the EU, as shown in the implementation of R2P. It is the use of “soft power” that Joseph Nye talks about.

When you play chess, every move has an importance! The problem here is that not enough people think globally.

Your adversary is the US, but the name of the US is never pronounced, it has become a taboo and very few speak about Obama’s “Asia pivot strategy”. How do we analyze the objectives of Washington in Sri Lanka and the methods used compared to those used in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, the Gaza, or to destabilize progressive regimes in Latin America?

These conflicts and tensions are the consequences of a global strategy and have to do with gaining access to energy resources and control over production and transport of oil, gas and water through domination of economic corridors, especially maritime corridors. The acceleration of conflicts and tensions is the result of the sharpening of the systemic crisis of the capitalist system. Today, with the declining means to guarantee its global supremacy, Washington is faced with a crisis of leadership. The desperate attempts of a dying super power to maintain global supremacy was one of the main reasons for the dismantling of former Yugoslavia and more recently Libya. Today, the same is true for Ukraine and the challenge represented by its enormous reserves of shale gaz.

2– Now, this is my second remark. I have try to show why the US and its western allies are involved in Sri Lanka. Now I would like to look at the type of soft power they are likely to use?

In 500 years BC, Sun Tzu wrote in his book “The Art of war”: ”supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.”

Strategic ‘Balkanisation’ of societies everywhere is being utilized to destabilize entire continents. This is done through provoking tidal waves of ethnic, religious, and political anarchy that can dismember countries and civilizations. The idea is to create ‘black holes of chaos’.

The US has historically undertaken regime change operations as a method of advancing continental destabilization and pushing Western power deeper into Eurasia. But I repeat, regime change is not the finality, it is only the means by which Washington seeks to achieve its ‘black holes of chaos’ strategy.

People here often speak of regime change in a very simplistic way as if the West was jealous of Sri Lanka’s achievements and its ability to defeat the most ruthless terrorist organization, the LTTE. But no one explains why this little island of Sri Lanka, even should it one day become the Wonder of Asia, arouses so much attention in Washington and Brussels!

Regime change has always been a characteristic of American foreign policy. Since Syria in 1949, it is estimated that the CIA has overthrown or attempted to overthrow over 50 governments, although it has onlyadmitted to 7. Today covert regime change operations are preferred when the interests of Great Powers are at stake.

Colour Revolutions are externally supported pro-Western “coups d’états”. They specifically use social media and NGOs as tools to infiltrate societies, increase their ranks, and to expand their efficiency once the regime change operation has commenced. By manipulating large groups of people, the illusion is created of a broad grassroots movement of disaffected masses rising up against a tyrannical dictatorship.

This misleading perception enables the coup attempt to gain wide support and acceptance among the Western community and civil society, and also denigrates the legitimate authorities that are trying to put down the illegal overthrow.

This new Obama method of soft warfare is extremely effective. It presents the affected State or government with the dilemma – to use force against the civilian protesters or resign! Therefore it is not difficult to see why they have been deployed all over. They have replaced ‘traditional’ CIA coup action and have become the modus operandi of covert regime change.

A global shift in US strategy is currently underway, with the US shifting from being “global policeman” to  “Lead from Behind” mastermind providing support to Colour Revolutions. Washington prefers a strategy of indirect approaches to projecting power rather than massive invasions and bombing runs.

3– In conclusion, as shown by the vote for the US resolution in Geneva, today the balance of forces has grown in favor of the West and against Sri Lanka!  Why? How do we explain this dangerous trend? The US buys the votes of certain countries, but that is not new, and the argument is not sufficient! More important they have been allowed to hijack the UN institution and this is widely underestimated. Sri Lanka is going in a wrong direction by privileging bilateral negotiations with an unequal “partner”! The UN was created in favor of small countries, guaranteeing sovereign equality among all States. Therefore, for countries such as Sri Lanka, the only political choice is to negotiate within a multilateral framework, where it can build a balance of forces in its favour.

Sri Lanka, during the war and since, has had to confront these geostrategic challenges. If Sri Lanka is to formulate an offensive strategy rather than a defensive one, it should take all these into consideration!