Question:

On 19/5/2009 speaking on state television Sri Lanka's President Mahinda Rajapaksa declared victory against the Tamil Tigers. He said, "Our motherland has been completely liberated from separatist terrorism." The state television also broadcasted images of the Tamil Tiger leader's body after it was recovered from the battlefield. "A few hours ago, the body of terrorist leader (Velupillai) Prabhakaran, who ruined this country, was found on the battleground," army Chief Gen. Sarath Fonseka told state television. In his victory speech the President Rajapaksa was anxious to strike a reconciliatory tone with Tamil people. He said,"Our intention was to save the Tamil people from the cruel grip of the (rebels). We all must now live as equals in this free country."

What is the reality of the conflict in Sri Lanka? Is it a local or regional conflict or an international conflict? In who's favour was the result of this conflict? Is it possible to say that the conflict in the island has come to an end or not?

Answer:

To answer these questions we shall say:

1-  The Sri Lankan conflict has often been portrayed as a protracted conflict between the Sri Lankan government and the militant movements of Sri Lankan's Tamil population. However, in reality the conflict is a classic Anglo-American struggle to control the strategic waterways of Sri Lanka and has been fought with the aid of regional proxy powers such as India and Pakistan.

2- Sri Lanka's importance lies in its location. It is situated about 19 miles off the southern coast of India thus overlooking one of the most important sea routes between West Asia and South East Asia. It is separated from the Indian subcontinent at its narrowest point by 22 miles of sea called Palk Strait. America has for sometime desired to control the Palk Straits and to make it part of Pentagon's military foot print. This will spur America to dominate the Indian Ocean and cut off vital oil supplies from the Middle East and Africa to China, as well as to thwart China's naval expansion westward. Immediately, after September 11 2001 attacks, the then US defence secretary Rumsfeld embarked on initiatives to bolster further the ties between Sri Lanka and the US. The control of Palk Straits would also hurt India's sea supply route to its eastern states and may necessitate traversing around Sri Lanka to reach these states thereby increasing the journey time and making it a very expensive alternative route. A reduction of influence of the Palk Straits would also hurt India's ambitions to become a regional naval power and limit its naval expansion plans eastwards. It is for these very reasons that China established military ties with the Sri Lankan government and supplied it with military equipment. It is also important to note that a decline in Indian influence over the Palk Straits would also affect British interests in the region. For hundreds of years Britain has sought to dominate the Indian Ocean to keep open sea routes located in the region to supply goods to far Eastern markets. American hegemony over the Indian Ocean and the Palk straits would hurt both Britain and Europe.  Hence the control of Sri Lanka is of immense importance to the US and will enable it to curb the threat of China and limit British and European influence in South East Asia and the Far East.

3- The roots of the conflict lie in the disenfranchised Tamil population that was brought over by the British from India's Tamil Nadu region to work on the coffee and tea plantations thereby transforming the island into a major tea producer. However, the majority Buddhist Sinhalese community disliked Britain's preferential treatment of the mainly-Hindu Tamils.  The independence of Sri Lanka in 1948 only accentuated the bitterness between the two communities, as successive Sinhalese governments stalled on promises to grant the Tamils who resided in the North of the country greater political rights. Disappointed by these turn of events, Tamils lost faith in their political leaders as well as the Sri Lankan political process that blocked every attempt to accommodate them. During this period a number of militant groups sprung up. The most prominent of them was The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam commonly known as the LTTE or the Tamil Tigers, which was formed in 1976 and headed by its founder, Velupillai Prabhakaran. Its aim was to create an independent Tamil state named Tamil Eelam in the north and the east of the island. It was only in the 1980s that the LTTE grew in popularity, especially after the failed attempt in 1983 of Tamil legislators to push through reforms for their people.  However, the LTTE quickly became infiltrated by British, Indian and US agents- leading to infighting and confrontation with other militant groups. In the 1980s Britain pushed India to support both LTTE and the Sri Lankan government in response to the growing American influence in Sri Lanka. Eventually, India under the pretext of preventing Tamils in India joining the Tamils in Northern Sri Lanka to create a separate homeland directly intervened in the conflict, especially when the Indian Congress ruling party realised that the Sri Lankan army was close to wiping out the LTTE. The intervention of India was continued in the form of a political face of it, and in the form of help to the Tigers from behind a curtain, On July 29, 1987, Indian involvement led to a peace accord signed between Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi Sri Lankan President Jayewardene. Under this accord, the Sri Lankan Government made a number of concessions to Tamil demands, including devolution of power to the provinces and the establishment of an Indian Peace Keeping Force in return for stopping support to Tamil insurgents.

4- Indian occupation of parts of Sri Lanka backfired and led to a humiliating withdrawal of Indian troops. America exploited the negative sentiments against India to cement its relations with the LTTE as well as the Sri Lankan government. But America gave preference to the latter. Thereafter, America's relations with the Sri Lankan government grew stronger and reached a new level of cooperation in the days after the attacks of September 11 2001. America now gave Sri Lankan government the green light to pursue the fight against LTTE as part of the global war on terrorism.  In return America sought to establish strong military and economic ties with Sri Lanka. In June 2002, Washington held discussions Colombo on a far-reaching Access and Cross Servicing Agreement (ACSA) that would enable US warships and aircraft to use facilities in Sri Lanka.  In July 2002, President Bush met with then-Sri Lankan Prime Minister Wickremesinghe at the White House and pledged U.S. support for peace and economic development in Sri Lanka. The United States and Sri Lanka signed a new Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) in 2002.An immediate casualty of this newfound relationship was Britain which found itself increasingly isolated for two primary reasons. First, the congress party in India had been replaced by the pro-American BJP, which was reluctant to adopt an aggressive policy towards Colombo. Second the Sri Lankan government was now under the influence of America. Thus Britain resorted to supporting the LTTE until its demise this year.

5- However, it was not until the election of President Mahinda Rajapaksa's in November 2005 that America finally got a Sri Lankan government in place that wholeheartedly supported the destruction of LTTE. In fact Rajapaksa's was elected based on his promise to defeat the LTTE.  Rajapaksa formed pacts with the hardline Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna party and extremist Buddhist monks. America openly welcomed his re-election."We remain committed to maintaining the historically close ties between our two countries," a press release from the US Department of State in Washington DC said. Adam Ereli, deputy spokesman for the US Department of State said: "The United States looks forward to working with President Rajapaksa as he confronts many significant and immediate challenges. " America through Rajapaksa and his brother who is  Chief of army staff embarked on a campaign to uproot LTTE. Sensing the change in Colombo Britain, India and Europe did their utmost to prevent Rajapaksa's government to wipe out the LTTE.

6-  America provided Rajapaksa's military with vital equipment by instructing Pakistan to help Sri Lanka. In March 2006, Sri Lankan authorities had sought Multi-Barrel Rocket Launcher System (MBRLS) and other advanced weapons from Pakistan when Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited Pakistan. In May 2008 that Sri Lankan Army Chief Lt-Gen Fonseka came to Pakistan and finalised a deal as per which Pakistan sold 22 Al-Khalid tanks to Sri Lanka in a deal worth over US$100 million. General Fonseka also gave a shopping list of weaponry worth about US$65 million to the Pakistani military authorities. On Jan 19, 2009, in a meeting between Pakistani Defence Secretary Lt-Gen (retd) Syed Athar Ali and his visiting Sri Lankan counterpart Gotabhaya Rajapakse in Rawalpindi, the two countries had agreed to enhance cooperation in military training, exercises and intelligence sharing regarding terrorism.

7-  As the Sri Lankan army made vital battle field gains against the LTTE, Britain her proxy India and Europe sought reconciliation between Rajapaksa's government and the LTTE. Their aim was to protect LTTE from being destroyed. America would occasionally join Britain and Europe in encouraging Rajapaksa to support a ceasefire and engage in peace talks-but this was only lip service. Hence a familiar pattern emerged-Britain and India would voice concern for Tamil civilians caught up in the conflict and advocate reconciliation. In response Rajapaksa's would reject such overtures. In fact in the latter days of the conflict Britain, Europe and India repeatedly called for a ceasefire and encouraged worldwide demonstrations by mobilising the Tamil diaspora to protest against Rajapaksa government's killing of civilians. The Sri Lankan government ignored such please and through US assistance via Pakistan managed to crush the LTTE-a militant organization that controlled vast swath of land in the north, ran its own police force, boasted of its own navy and air force.

The defeat of the LTTE means that British and Indian influence in the North of the country has been marginalized and now gives America the opportunity to consolidate her stranglehold over Sri Lanka and establish a permanent military presence in the country. It also allows America to control the Palk Straits and wield her naval power in the Indian Ocean to counter the Chinese threat. Furthermore,  America can use Sri Lanka to pressurise India -given that the congress party has returned to power for another 5 years-to follow its policies for the region. However, a lot depends on Rajapaksa's ability to repair relations with the Tamils and accommodate their political concerns. America has already voiced support for such an endeavour and has earmarked vital aid via the IMF to Rajapaksa's government to accomplish such a task. A stable Sri Lanka is vital for American interests, and given the history of the region, Britain and her surrogate India will be looking to re-establish themselves in Sri Lanka. The Anglo-American struggle may have subsided for now, but it is certainly not over.  

Hizb ut-Tahrir Wilayah of Pakistan called rallies in all major Pakistani cities on 31st May 2009. In a press release from Naveed Butt, the Official Spokesman of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Pakistan, it is stated "The government sent hundreds of police and intelligence, armed with tear gas and batons, to prevent the people from gathering at the venue for peaceful protest. The government beat Hizb activists and participants of the rally and arrested more than 30 people from Lahore, Karachi and Rawalpindi. As Hizb ut-Tahrir is a non-violent political organisation and the method it employs has no room for militancy, therefore Hizb, instead of responding to a brick with a rock, opted itself principled stance of non-violence and dispersed peacefully."

Full Press Release

Question:

North Korea announced on 25th May, 2009, that it carried out a successful nuclear test. It had earlier (on 8th May) warned that it was strengthening its nuclear arsenal, and accused the Obama administration of hostile actions against it. It had also refused to resume the six-party negotiations. Then on 27th May, 2009, it declared that North Korea was 'not committed to the ceasing of hostilities' signed with the United States. This refusal was in response to South Korea's participation in the American initiative to prevent nuclear proliferation. [al-Jazeerah: 31.05.09].

What is the reaction of the international community towards these events? Are these leading to an escalation of tensions and war, or is a war ruled out; will negotiations be resumed?

Answer:

Yes, indeed there is escalation of tension especially after North Korea's refusal to back away from the armistice which was signed between North Korea and the US on 27th July, 1953 which resulted in ending the Korean War which was raging since 25th June, 1950. This armistice was simply a ceasing of hostilities and not a peace treaty as such. The escalation in tensions came to fore when North Korea carried out its first nuclear test in October, 2006, and reached alarming levels last month when it tested its ballistic missiles which means that North Korea is now capable of launching its long-range nuclear warhead missile without having to use aircrafts which may be confronted and prevented from reaching their target. Then after the 25th May, 2009 test, tensions have reached to even more alarming levels when it announced its latest successful nuclear test.

As for the international reactions:

1. International reactions have come from various countries calling for a UN Security Council resolution to penalise North Korea. While North Korea has warned of taking other steps as well, the official North Korean News Agency carried a statement on 25th May, 2009 of the North Korean Foreign Ministry's official spokesman saying: "If the UNSC will make further provocative actions, this will inevitably lead to the DPRK's approach towards adopting stronger self-defensive counter-measures."

2. With regard to the US reaction, Barack Obama has stated: "North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security, and I strongly condemn their reckless action. North Korea's action pose a grave security threat to the people North-East Asia and it is a flagrant violation of the international law as well as North Korea's earlier commitments. Now the US and the international community must take steps to counter that." [Russia Today: 25.05.2009].

The US Defense Secretary Robert Gates stated at the Asian Security Forum conference held in Singapore that: "The United States will not accept North Korea as a nuclear-weapons state." He warned against the flaring of a nuclear arms race and said: "We will not stand idly by as North Korea builds the capability to wreak destruction on any target in the region, or on us." On the issue of nuclear proliferation, Gates said: "The transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or non-state entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States and its allies, and we would hold North Korea fully accountable for the consequences of such action." [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09]. This is how the US expressed its anger over the North Korean actions and indicated that these acts constitute a threat to world peace, especially in North East Asia and it (US) will take steps against North Korea which it warned against transferring the nuclear technology to other countries or non-state entities.

America's story with North Korea's nuclear programme is not new, in fact it began in 1986 when the US demanded detailed information on its nuclear programme which North Korea refused to hand over to the US, instead it gave those detailed documents running into 19,000 pages to China. An agreement was reached between US and North Korea in 1994 after the US warned North Korea to targeting its nuclear reactors. This agreement calls for putting North Korea's nuclear programme to a halt, shutting down of its Yongbyon reactors which was in operation since 1987. This was in exchange for the US supplying two light-water type reactors. But the US failed to honour its part of the promise and hence Korea resumed its nuclear activities, restarted the Yongbyon reactors and expelled the two international observers from the country in 2002. This was after the US accused it of carrying on a clandestine nuclear programme and North Korea counter accusing the US of breaching its promises to supplying two light-water powered nuclear reactors.

In October, 2006, North Korea announced its first nuclear test, and in February 2007, the six-party gathering which comprises the North & South Koreas, the United States, Russia, China and Japan reached an agreement to shut down the Yongbyon reactors in exchange for assistance in fuel supplies and the US announced an assistance of $25 million. After this cash assistance reached North Korea, it allowed access to inspection and observers‘ teams and shut down the Yongbyon reactors. Then in July 2008, North Korea submitted its report on the nuclear programme within the framework of the deal that called for scrapping its nuclear programme. The talks ended between them in 2008 as a result of their differences on ways to verify compliance to North Korea's earlier obligations provided for in the previous agreements.

In the beginning of the current year, North Korea declared its withdrawal from the six-party talks and resumption of the Yongbyon reactors after having expelled the two international observers and threatened to resume its nuclear tests. In April this year, it carried out a test of its long-range missile capable of carrying satellites as it mentioned. The UN Security Council passed a resolution in condemnation and called for applying sanctions which were earlier frozen after the resolution no. 1718 of 2006 in the aftermath of its first nuclear test. Then on 14th April, 2009, it announced its decision to withdraw from the six-party talks in the wake of a UNSC resolution the previous day. It called the six-party talks as pointless and stated that it was no longer obliged to comply with any agreements reached among the group. A few days back, i.e. on 25th May, 2009, it announced the successful nuclear test.

From the above, it is evident that the United States has been cheating North Korea by requiring it to shut down its nuclear activities in exchange for no incentive except false promises and obligations which are either delayed, denied or short-changed. However, the North Koreans are aware of it all. Whenever it saw the US evading or dodging, it resumed its nuclear activity. It appears that the US has not been conclusively decisive on the subject. Perhaps it is because it does not intend to strain its relations with China where it has its interests which are far more important and bigger than the nuclear reactors in North Korea.

Also, from America's actions, its statements and its reactions to the events in the North East Asian region, it is clear that the US has other objectives. One of these goals is to strengthen its presence in the region and consolidate itself there in order to render the countries in that region to become dependent upon US assistance. This will ensure that US is in a position to exploit and extortionate them especially since it has a large military presence in the area with a troop strength of around 250,000. So we see the US Defense Secretary, Robert Gates holding a special meeting with the defence ministers of South Korea and Japan on the sidelines of the Asian Security Forum being held currently in Singapore, after which he announced: "it is vital that United States, South Korea and Japan as well as the entire world cooperate to face this multi-faceted problem." [Radio Sawa: 31.05.09].

This means that the US is harnessing this crisis in order to strengthen its own stronghold in the region and demonstrate its leadership to the world as well as scare China that it (US) may perhaps start a war in the region with China's neighbour and ally, North Korea at any time. In other words, the US wants to use this opportunity to blackmail China in order to extract compromises from it in the area of economy, trade and finance as well as regional political issues and thereby prevent or at least delay merger of Taiwan into China. Thus China can be restrained and tied within its own borders by using the issue of North Korea's nuclear and missiles issue. This is not strange or unexpected of America which is trying to install anti-missile guns in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic against Russia citing threats from Korean and the Iranian missiles.

3. As for China's stance, it is a repetition of its earlier stand when North Korea had conducted its first test. China had called for restraint and diplomatic efforts. At the Asian Security Forum in Singapore, the Chief of Staff of the Chinese Armed Forces Gen. Ma Shao Tian called for adopting calm and calibrated methods in dealing with North Korea. He also called for eliminating all weapons of mass destruction from the region [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09].

This indicates that China is not ready for a strike on North Korea. Just as the US is exploiting the nuclear issue, the Chinese are also trying to make use of the opportunities presented by North Korea's nuclear and missile tests. It is using the North Korean card to deal with the Taiwan issue and to facilitate its merger into mainland China. The Chinese objective appears to be to use this as a pressure tool upon the US so that America accedes to Taiwan's merger with the mainland. Thus both the United States as well as China are exploiting the Korean problem vis-a-vis Taiwan, but of course in opposite directions.

4. As for South Korea, it does not want to see any more deterioration in the situation which may lead to war which certainly will be to its disadvantage. The South Korean Defence Minister Lee Sang Hee told the Asian Security Forum in Singapore that his country will work with the six-party forum and the international community to find a solution to the solve the crisis with North Korea. [Al-Jazeerah: 30.05.09]. South Korea has consistently been attempting to resolve its problems with North Korea and two summit meetings have been held between their presidents in 200 C.E and 2007 C.E, each of them on South Korean initiative.

5. As regards the Russian reaction, it came in the statement issued by the Russian President's Office after the telephone conversation between President Medvedev and Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso. It said that the two sides agree on the importance of a strong response towards these actions that constitute a threat to the world security regime. [Russia Today: 30.05.09]. Alexei Borodavkin, Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia called upon Pyong Yang to desist from launching its ballistic missile. [Russia Today: 27.03.09].

This indicates that Russia's position on the North Korean issue differs from that of China and that by adopting such a stance, Russia aims to have very good relations with Japan. It also indicates that Russia does not have an interest in North Korea developing its nuclear and missiles programme, and also that Russia does not want the US to use this issue as a pretext and gain a stronghold in the region. Russia also wants North Korea to remain committed to the six-party dialogue and not withdraw from it so that a solution can be reached to halt its nuclear and missile programme and thereby put an end to what is referred to as the Korean Peninsula conflict.

6. As for whether this escalation of tension would lead to war, or will the US strike at the North Korean nuclear installations, well, it is improbable and far-fetched, at least in the foreseeable future. America did not resort to such measures when North Korea did not have either a nuclear warhead or ballistic missile and the US was aware that Pyong Yang was heading in that direction and expected it to eventually acquire nuclear capability. How can it now strike when North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and especially since its Pyong Yang still has strong relations with China?

Thus the chances of America launching attacks on North Korea are very slim in the near future at least. However it is expected that America will resort to other means and incentives to bring North Korea to the negotiating table and by bringing South Korea closer to it using various means to penetrate there and find channels of communications with some North Korean elements through which to work to change the leadership and bringing in a more moderate leadership, i.e. a leadership which understands America and accepts its offers and inducements.

This is the method which America had adopted with all the communist countries. North Korea meanwhile is facing a severe economic crisis as a result of its strict isolation. Though the desired results cannot be guaranteed through all these efforts, America however is expected to exert all it can.

BBC is ready to broadcast a gay love affair involving Muslims

In a further effort by the British establishment to raise the bar for Muslims to prove their loyalty to Britain, the BBC will use its flagship programme EastEnders to tackle a storyline which will feature a Muslim man embarking upon a gay affair. The Muslim character Syed Masood, played by Marc Elliott, will fall for openly gay man Christian Clarke (John Partridge) and the pair will share an on-screen kiss. "I think EastEnders would be doing the programme a disservice if they didn't give a voice to various communities," Elliot told the BBC Asian Network. The plot is expected to hit TV screens from next month.

One in three Muslims feel discriminated in Europe

About 31 percent of Muslims in the European Union feel they were discriminated against in 2008, according to an EU survey of 23,500 members of ethnic minorities and migrant communities published on Thursday. Ten percent of Muslims who experienced prejudice believed this was solely due to their religious beliefs, while over half felt that their ethnic origin was the grounds for the discrimination, according to the survey by the EU's Fundamental Rights Agency. The report, which collates the opinions of Muslims living in 14 European countries and minorities in general from the 27 EU member states, found that up to 81 percent of interviewees did not report discriminatory acts they suffered. A fifth of Muslim victims were concerned about possible negative consequences if they reported the discriminatory acts. Anti-foreigner and anti-Muslim rhetoric and in some cases violence has increased in several countries in the run up to the European elections and some analysts are forecasting a swing to the xenophobic right in European parliamentary elections from June 4-7.

UAE establishes a French military base on its soil

This week the ruler of the UAE along with Nicolas Sarkozy the president of France inaugurated a French military base in the UAE. The base will host 500 personnel from the French navy, the army, and the air force. It will be able to simultaneously accommodate two frigates of the French fleet operating in the region. Speaking to Gulf News, Riad Kahwaji, head of the Dubai-based Institute for Near East and Gulf Military Analysis, said France and the UAE signed a reciprocal defence accord in 1995 that paved the way for further cooperation in a number of projects including the base. He said the French base is the first of its kind in the Arabian Gulf. "The US has a number of military, air and maritime bases in Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain. The Abu Dhabi French Maritime Base is the first foreign military base for a friendly army in the UAE," Kahwaji said.

He further said, "The decision to host the French base was taken by the UAE government to allow a country like France to take part in ensuring the security of oil supplies from the region in the case of a hostile action against oil carriers by terrorist groups, pirate gangs or even by a hostile government." The reality is that the UAE has again ceded its sovereignty to a colonialist power. This is clearly forbidden by Islam.

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

وَلَن يَجْعَلَ اللّهُ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ سَبِيلاً

"Allah will not allow the disbelievers to have an authority over the believers." [An-Nisaa, 4:141]

After the bomb blast in Lahore, Taliban warn of more attacks on Pakistan

This week Hakimullah Mehsud, a young Taliban commander and lieutenant of Baitullah Mehsud, the chief of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, told the Pakistani newspaper Dawn that more attacks would follow the one in Lahore. Hakimullah Mehsud, who spoke from an undisclosed location, claimed responsibility for the Lahore bombing. "We want the people of Lahore, Rawalpindi, Islamabad and Multan to leave those cities, as we plan major attacks against government facilities in coming days and weeks," he said in a phone call to Reuters. He said that the Lahore attack was a response to Pakistan's recent military campaign against the Taliban in Swat, an area north of the capital, which was overrun by militants earlier this year. "We have been looking for a target from the day the military launched the operation in Swat," Mr. Mehsud said.

After eight years of fighting in the wilderness and on the verge of a cataclysmic defeat, America has once more managed to divert the attention of the Taliban to fight the Pakistani army. Rather than fighting each other, both the Taliban and the Pakistani army should unite to expel America from the region- the real enemy of Muslims and Islam.

North Korea shows Pakistan how to deal with the US

Once again North Korea has defied international pressure and tested a nuclear bomb, as well as several missiles. Once again America's weakness has been exposed in its futile response to pressurize North Korea to desist from such actions. If a minnow state like North Korea can take successive bold steps over the past few years to thwart American primacy in the region, then it beggars disbelief as to why a country like Pakistan with far greater nuclear weapons and missiles, and a larger professional army cannot take a similar stand against America. Instead the leadership of Pakistan has capitulated and has turned on its own people like a savage dog- all in a desperate bid to please their American master. In the ensuing mayhem thousands of innocent civilians have been killed and over 2 million have been made homeless. Whilst the nuclear weapons designed to defend the life and honour of the Pakistani people remain a military museum gathering dust.