-K.Arumugam, Chairperson of human rights NGO Suaram, November 11, 2013.

COMMENT If Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak steps on Sri Lankan soil for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) later this week, he will be committing a costly political blunder.
It will surely earn the displeasure of the Malaysian Tamils who had supported him in the 13th general election. In a wider context, he will be seen to have duped minority groups by trading humanity and human dignity for hegemonic sovereignty that acted with impunity.

Sri Lanka is accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity for killing over 40,000 civilian Tamils in the last phase of war that ended on May 17, 2009. That military act was brutal and its conduct was without witness save for military personnel.
The ethnic Tamils of Sri Lanka were living as a distinct nationhood parallel to that of the Singhala Kingdom prior to colonisation by the British, when Sri Lanka became a unitary state.

Continuing the British system after Independence the majority Singhala politicians introduced systematic marginalisation, disenfranchisement of citizens and discriminatory policies against the Tamils, who fought back.

When their non-violent struggle was met with the brute power of the state, the Tamils were pushed to take up arms in their right to self-determination. If their struggle had taken place after the Second World War, it would have been called an Independence struggle.  That was the setting.
Immediately after the war in May 2009, Sri Lanka diplomatically labelled the crushing of the Tamils as a military solution to liberate the community from the control of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam who were called “terrorists”.

A resolution was tabled at the Human Rights Council (HRC) on May 26, 2009 justifying the military solution as an act in line with the promotion and protection of human rights’ standards.  Malaysia was bought into that and voted for Sri Lanka, despite local Tamils crying foul.

However, soon after images of the war began to surface. These fuelled worldwide condemnation. Various levels of compromise in the UN monitoring of the event were exposed. Sri Lanka tactfully roped in China and India as accomplices, with support from a few allies in the region.

British television station, Channel 4, screened the first video titled ‘The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka’ exposing summary executions and indiscriminate bombings and abductions. Coupled with UN Panel of Experts findings and international lobby by Tamil diaspora the UN conceded that Sri Lanka must be pushed to account for its conduct during the war.

Contradictory stance

Pressure then built up on Najib to correct Malaysia’s foreign policy on Sri Lanka. Subsequently, Malaysia refused to support Sri Lanka on resolutions tabled in 2012 and 2013 on issues of accountability on the latter’s conduct during the war.

Was Najib playing politics to appease the Tamils for their votes in GE13 or was he a statesman in the making?
Press reports and answers to questions in Parliament indicate that Malaysia’s foreign policy has been somewhat compromised in favour of Sri Lanka. Malaysia treats incidents within Sri Lanka as domestic and sovereign in nature.

But this is contrary to Najib’s concern for peace across the globe.  He has also criticised regimes that have killed their own people. His role on Syria and Rohingya Muslims has been sound.

Just three months ago, at the Mahathir Award for Global Peace ceremony, Najib called upon all nations to share a common responsibility to secure lasting peace.

“It is a challenge that must be met collectively. It is imperative that we achieve a peace premised upon a covenant of the willing, not one enforced by hegemony or secured through coercion,” he reminded.

Thus CHOGM will hand Najib an acid test, revealing the difference between what he professes and what he is. For him to rely on Wisma Putra’s policy on Sri Lanka will be a disaster. Its synthesis may unwittingly put Malaysian investments in Sri Lanka at risk.

In a written reply to a question in the last sitting of the Parliament, the Foreign Affairs Minister failed in bringing home the profound arguments on accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the government forces of Sri Lanka in May 2009.

These were documented in volumes and made available to all parties during the Human Rights Council Sessions in 2012 and 2013. But sadly, Wisma Putra draws investors to Sri Lanka, ignoring the fact that this is indeed supportive of a regime run by war criminals.

One should view the Calum Macrae’s ‘No Fire Zone’ – the latest authenticated documentary which is available online – to get a glimpse of the Sri Lanka episode for a fair appraisal of Wisma Putra.

This is precisely the reason why Wisma Putra is deadly against the public viewing of the ‘No Fire Zone’ in Malaysia.

With the decision of Indian premier Manmohan Singh not to attend CHOGM, it is now imperative for Najib to reconsider his decision to go to Colombo.

Sri Lanka’s peace is not premised upon a covenant of the willing, but enforced by hegemony, secured through coercion and filled war crimes and crimes against humanity.