Sri Lanka: U.S. efforts to help end

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 COLOMBO 000012

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR D, SA, SA/INS, SA/PD, INR/NESA;
NSC FOR E. MILLARD

PLEASE ALSO PASS TOPEC

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/05/14
TAGS: PREL PGOV KPAO PINR CE LTTE
SUBJECT: Sri Lanka: U.S. efforts to help end
cohabitation impasse net big local reaction

Refs: 03 Colombo 2200, and previous

(U) Classified by James F. Entwistle, Deputy Chief of
Mission. Reasons 1.5 (b,d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: Sri Lanka has been abuzz the last
several days with reaction to the Secretary's letters to
the President and the PM, and the Department's
statement issued after the Deputy Secretary met with
Minister Moragoda last week. Press reaction has been
mixed, with some commentary supporting the U.S. effort
to help break the cohabitation logjam and others
critical of USG involvement in the matter. In the only
statement thus far from a political party, the radical
JVP flayed the USG for its efforts. Local observers we
have spoken to have generally praised the U.S. We think
the USG messages have helped by reminding the parties
involved in the impasse that the international community
is watching and wants them to compromise. Reftel
reviews the Ambassador's meeting with the PM regarding
the Secretary's letter and Septel reviews that with the
President. A full media play cable also follows Septel.
END SUMMARY.

--------------
Mixed Press Reaction
--------------


2. (C) Sri Lanka has been abuzz the last several days
with reaction to Secretary Powell's letters to President
Chandrika Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Ranil
Wickremesinghe, and the Department's statement issued
after Deputy Secretary Armitage's December 29 meeting
with Economic Reforms Minister Milinda Moragoda.
(Although the texts of the Secretary's letters were
apparently not made public, their basic contents were
leaked to the press either by the President's or PM's
office, or both. See Reftel for a readout of the
Ambassador's December 31 meeting with the PM and Septel
reviewing his January 2 meeting the President.) To a
large extent, the local press, in remarking on the USG
messages, conflated the Secretary's letters with the
Department's statement. At times, for example, the
coverage made it appear that Minister Moragoda's visit
to Washington precipitated the Secretary's letters, when
in fact the letters were in process well before
Moragoda's trip.


3. (SBU) Thus far, press reaction has been mixed, with
some editorials supporting the U.S. effort to help break
the cohabitation logjam and others critical of USG
involvement in the matter. (Note: See Septel for full
review of the media play.) On the positive side, all
four Sunday (January 4) English-language papers ran
front-page articles on the Secretary's letters that were
basically accurate in describing the nature of the U.S.
effort, i.e., that we urged both leaders to work
together in the national interest. In terms of
commentary, the U.S. effort was also touched on in a
basically positive manner in the following two
editorials:

-- A January 5 editorial in the independent English-
language DAILY MIRROR "welcomed international mediation
from countries like the USA, India or UK, who all have
an interest in bringing about a permanent settlement
here."


-- A January 5 editorial in the independent Tamil daily
THINAKKURAL said "while the pressure put forward by the
US clearly shows the US interest in solving the ethnic
problem it can be considered as the pressure
representing the international community."

4. (SBU) Some press reaction was not as positive:

-- A January 4 commentary in the independent English-
language weekly SUNDAY TIMES said the PM was pursuing "a
strategy of destabilizing the President by non-violent
strategic means" involving the "application of pressure
via the international community -- in other words,
Ranil's favorite international safety net." After
meeting Moragoda, the Deputy Secretary "soon issued a
statement saying the President's moves are not good for
the country or the peace process. There of course was
little or no subtlety in it...it leaves room for
everyone to say exactly where America's sympathies are."

-- January 4 commentary in the independent weekender
SUNDAY LEADER said the Department's statement "by
remarking that the political crisis was precipitated in
Colombo while Wickremesinghe was in Washington, the US
had implied very strongly, it is Kumaratunga who is
responsible for the crisis."

-- January 4 commentary in the government-owned weekly
SUNDAY OBSERVER criticized the GSL's support of the
"hegemony of the U.S. of A," implying that the U.S.
messages were some sort of quid pro quo favor made by
the U.S. to the PM.

-- A January 1 editorial in the independent Sinhala-
language daily DIVAINA, critical of the U.S. armed
interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq, closed with the
following question: "Does Armitage's statement mean
that if Sri Lanka's crisis in not solved, the US is
going to invade Sri Lanka?"

--------------
JVP Flays U.S.; No Comment yet from Tigers
--------------


5. (SBU) In the only statement thus far from a
political party, the radical Janantha Vimukthi Peramuna
(JVP) flayed the USG for its efforts. The party's
statement came in the wake of the Department's
December 29 statement. In its statement, the JVP
rejected "the attempt of the USA or any other force
tampering in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka." The
group further denounced the PM, accusing him of "getting
`world powers' to intimidate people."


6. (SBU) For its part, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE) organization has not weighed in with their
own commentary on the Secretary's letters or the
Department's statement. The pro-LTTE website
"TamilNet," however, reported the Department's statement
in a factual way in a December 30 posting.

--------------
Praise from Local Observers
--------------


7. (C) Local observers that we have touched base with
have generally praised the U.S. efforts:

-- Jehan Perera of the National Peace Council, a local
think-tank, said he felt the majority of Sri Lankans
were happy with the U.S. efforts. He added that the two
Sri Lankan leaders seemed more focused on personal
dynamics rather than external concerns at this point, so
he wondered whether the U.S. effort would have much of
an impact.

-- Ven. Bellanwilla Wimalaratna Thero, a well-regarded
Colombo-area Buddhist monk, spoke appreciatively of the
U.S. messages. He further hoped that other donor
countries would follow the U.S. lead in urging the two
parties to stop bickering and work together.
-- Azmi Thassim, director of the Chamber of Commerce in
the southern coastal town of Hambantota, felt that only
the U.S. would be able to end the current political
impasse between the President and PM. Thassim, a
Muslim, was thankful for the U.S. efforts and its
support for a near-term resumption of GSL-LTTE peace
talks.

-- Kethesh Loganathan, an analyst at the Center for
Policy Alternatives, a local think-tank, told poloff
January 5 that he thought the U.S. message was a welcome
one. That said, he remarked that the U.S. was risking
getting too involved in the details of the cohabitation
conflict, which might lead to misunderstandings down the
road.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


8. (C) The anti-U.S. reaction came from expected
quarters: the JVP is consistently anti-American and the
press criticism came from papers that often take an
anti-U.S. slant. Despite the flak, we think that the
U.S. efforts have helped the situation by reminding Sri
Lanka's cohabitation antagonists that the international
community is watching. The message that the U.S. would
like to see the President and the PM compromise so the
GSL can get back to focusing on the peace process
resonates with many in the public. Whether U.S. efforts
-- in league with those of others in the international
community -- might provide the two sides a fresh impetus
to compromise remains unclear given the depth of
distrust with which the two sides regard each other.
END COMMENT.


9. (U) Minimize considered.

LUNSTEAD