இலங்கைக்குக் கடன்வழங்க சரியான தருணமில்லை: அமெரிக்கா

One thought on “இலங்கைக்குக் கடன்வழங்க சரியான தருணமில்லை: அமெரிக்கா”

1. During the USA Presidential Elections Hillary Clinton bragged that she is more qualified to be the President of USA being the more experienced candidate , and that her rival Barrack Obama was only a junior Senator. Today, Hillary Clinton does not show any mature political experience being lead by the nose by a David Miliband whose political experience or political maturity is nothing to write home about.
   She is defending a ruthless terrorist group in Sri Lanka, refusing to accept a Sovereign Government’s version of the situation. She has not dared to question Miliband’s desperate interest in stopping the on going military operations against a terrorist group that had for thirty years devastated a developing country, assassinating using snipers, pistol gangs, grenade lobbers, claymore bombs, and worst of all suicide human suicide bombs, innocent people, Officers of the Security Forces, Ministers of the Governments, Prime Ministers, Presidents, and intellectuals . Hillary Clinton has ventured to help Miliband without knowing what exactly is his interest in the terrorists in Sri Lanka. David Miliband’s interest in Sri Lanka is not in the safety of the Tamil Civilians in the conflict zone, but the safety of the terrorist leaders trapped in the zone.
   Why ?
   Because the Labour government of which Miliband is the Foreign Secretary is loosing its popularity, and has to assure a sound vote base at all costs for its future victories. The Tamils in UK are a sizable Community, which is a floating vote in many British Constituencies that could determine the results of the coming British elections.
   Therefore, Miliband is interested in winning over the UK Tamil voters. He cares less for the Tamil Civilians caught in the no fire zone, of whom he makes an excuse to help the terrorists his main interest. Miliband has hidden some of the facts that interest, him from Hillary Clinton.
   What now are these facts that Miliband had hidden from Hillary Clinton, to make her issue a statement in favour of the terrorists, and unfavourable to the Government of Sri Lanka ?
   The Tamil Voters in UK are Tamils, with a divisive mind. They do not want to preserve the unitary status of Sri Lanka, but want to set up a separate State as a Homeland of the Tamils. For this purpose the Tamils in the diaspora- that is those Tamils spread all over the world, more importantly in UK, Canada, Norway, USA, and France had been contributing large sums of money to strengthen the terrorists in Sri Lanka, to fight the Government Forces and set up the Tamil Homeland.
   If the terrorists are wiped out from Sri Lanka the dream of the Tamil diaspora to set up their homeland fizzles out as well. Therefore, the desperate attempts of the Tamils in the diaspora are to force foreign governments to intervene to declare a ceasefire in Sri Lanka, to thereby provide a safe passage out of the conflict zone to the terrorist leaders. Their removal to safety to an unnamed destination, would assure the diaspora a return of terrorism to Sri Lanka on a later date with renewed force to set up their Homeland.
   The Tamil diaspora had made financial contributions to the terrorists for the last 25 years which is estimated by the UK Based Jane’s Magazine, as being between 200, to 300 millions of Dollars per annum. This money they had used primarily to acquire arms and armaments, and produce destructive material such as bombs , war planes, ships for arms, drug and human trafficking, bombs, suicide boats, and train young men and women to explode themselves as living human bombs.
   These terrorists still have large sums of money which they use through their proxies in UK, USA, Canada, Norway, France etc., for a grand scale propaganda campaign, buying American Attorneys, Associations and Institutions such as the human rights watch. They create an image of the terrorists in Sri Lanka as a “civilised group” who can hobnob with American Senators, Foreign Ministers, Ambassadors, and now even recognised by the American Secretary of State and even the President of USA to make statements in favour of them.
   It is a shame for America, which called from housetops that the election of Barack Obama is the dawn of a “change” in America, not to allow that change to be reflected in its Foreign Policy.
   Hillary Clinton’s statement that “ it is not an appropriate time to consider a massive International Monetary Fund loan for Sri Lanka “, because of the determined effort of the government of Sri Lanka to end a terrorism that had lasted thirty long years killing over 70 000 of its people, is a shameless reminder to the world, that America still stands by reactionary forces, and against developing Nations.
   Clinton told reporters that the United States has been “trying to convince both sides,” the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil Tiger guerrillas, to stop fighting.
   Who does she refer to as “both sides” in her statement ? The both sides she refers to are the Government of Sri Labka and the Terrorists. This itself makes one regretfully come to the conclusion that America whether it is of Bush or Obama will remain a country self centred, and against progress of developing countries of the world.
   America had always in the past treated developing nations that do not toe its line with disdain refusing aid, imposing economic sanctions, trade and financial embargoes, for example Cuba, and Iraq. It used CIA agents to change governments such as Chile of Salvador Allande, or just change political leaders, such as in Panama and Grenada.
   Today it appears Hillary Clinton uses 1.9 million IMF Loan to Sri Lanka, to force Sri Lanka to come to terms with terrorists !
   Is this the political experience Hillary Clinton is putting into practice ? The American claim to be the leading nation of the world demands assistance to elected governments to defend itself against different enemies of those Nations, such as invaders or terrorists. But Hillary Clinton has on the other hand taken it on herself on the advice of a speculative politician David Miliband to help a terrorist group, against a Sovereign State.
   A respectable politician will never equate a government, and a group of terrorists. In doing that Hillary Clinton raises terrorism to a higher pedestal. How can America fight Talibans in Afghanistan and Al Qaida in Iraq and at the same time defend a group of terrorists because they terrorises only Sri Lanka a developing country, not America or the West ?
   If Hillary Clinton is an experienced politician as she claims, she should have consulted the President of Sri Lanka before issuing the questionable statement placing a Sovereign State in par with a despicable group of terrorists. Hillary Clinton perhaps thinks she is too great a politicians to come down to speak to a President of a small Nation. That sense of superiority comes from inexperience and lack of modesty.
   We hope that better wisdom prevail and Hillary Clinton will not mix up issuing statements to save the interest of the Civilians in a conflict zone ,and grant of loans to a developing Nations.
   Further more, the Tamil civilians in the no-fire zone are a part of the Sri Lankan Nation and the Government of Sri Lanka is fully aware of its responsibility towards them. Therefore every thing is being done by the Government of Sri Lanka, as much as is possible, to safeguard the interest of the civilian population while subjugating and destroying the terrorists.
   If it gives Hillary Clinton a pleasure in causing harassment to a government by not coming to its help at a time it needs friends, America may as well stop the IMF loan. There would be other countries, such as Russia, China, or Iran who will certainly come forward to help Sri Lanka.