Special Media Reaction: E.U. Ban on LTTE Travel

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001714

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR S/ES, INR/MR, PA
SA/INS (CAMP, DEAN) SA/PD (SCENSNY, ROGERS, PALLADINO);
SSA/PAS

SENSITIVE

E.O. 12958:N/A
TAGS: PHUM KPAO PTER OIIP PREL CE LTTE
SUBJECT: Special Media Reaction: E.U. Ban on LTTE Travel



1. (U) Summary: The Sri Lankan media reacted strongly to the
European Union's travel ban on the LTTE. Mainstream and
Sinhala nationalist media led with news of the ban, praising
the move and speculating the decision could lead quickly to
the EU's designation of the LTTE as a Foreign Terrorist
Organization(FTO). The Tamil and pro-LTTE press,
conversely, criticized the travel ban and highlighted LTTE
political wing leader S. Tamilselvan's stern warning that it
would negatively affect the peace process. End Summary.


2. (U) English and Sinhala media led September 28 with
reports of the EU's ban on travel to the EU by the LTTE,
and the next day published reaction statements from the
Sinhala nationalist parties Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)
and Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) praising the ban and calling
for the immediate designation of the LTTE as a terrorist
organization in all European countries. The Sinhala
nationalist press alleged "pro-Tiger" Norway had failed to
influence the EU decision despite hard lobbying. The
mainstream Daily Mirror was the only English paper to
prominently publish the LTTE's response to the EU travel
ban. It reported Tiger political wing leader S. Tamilselvan
saying September 28 at a press conference in Kilinochchi:
"While the EU decision gives into the sinister motives of
the government it also scuttles the stability of peace moves
in Sri Lanka."


3. (U) English and Sinhala language editorialists also
focused on the issue. Government owned Daily News praised
the "long overdue" EU travel ban on the LTTE and contended
the EU should also ban suspected LTTE fund-raising
organizations operating there, stopping short of naming the
controversial Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO). The
Daily News editor wrote, "Our position should not be seen as
synonymous with the chauvinistic elements of Southern Sri
Lanka, which are strongly resisting our efforts to solve our
ethnic conflict by peaceful means. Rather we are in perfect
agreement with the Co-Chairs who are calling on the LTTE to
demonstrate their peaceful intentions, if any. A moral
obligation is cast on the global community. to bring the
LTTE to the negotiating table." Mainstream independent
(though pro-UNP) Daily Mirror welcomed the ban, saying it
"serves the cause of democracy and human rights that they
seek to promote throughout the world." The Mirror also
called Sinhala nationalist forces to task, stating, "The
greater responsibility devolves on the majority Sinhala
community and their leaders. They should realize it had been
the reluctance on their part, particularly those who have
given leadership to extremist sections, to insure justice
and equality to minorities that gave birth to separatist and
terrorist movements." The Sinhala nationalist Island called
for "Three cheers for a declaration!" and contended the EU
ban means "the LTTE can no longer justify terror on any
grounds."


4. (U) The Sinhala sister papers of the English dailies
editorialized much the same way, whereas the independent
Lakbima (note: no English counterpart paper) made a more
negative argument, comparing the alleged lethargic attitude
of the West on terrorism before September 11 to the
international community's repeated insistence now that the
LTTE give up terrorism and join the democratic process.


5. (U) Pro-LTTE English and independent Tamil newspapers
carried messages from the pro-LTTE Tamil National Alliance
(TNA) and several international Tamil organizations
condemning the EU decision and featuring Tamilselvan's
comments on the matter. Independent Thinakkural bannered,
"Peace process will be badly affected," while mainstream
independent Virakesari led with, "EU ban shocks LTTE." The
pro-LTTE Tamil Net web site ran a more measured headline,
saying: "Tamilselvan urges EU to reconsider stand on LTTE."
Flagship Tamil newspaper Virakesari editorialized the EU was
attempting to "disturb the peace," arguing the ban would
encourage Sinhala Buddhist extremists to further repress the
rights of Tamils. Pro-LTTE Sudar Oli criticized the
decision as biased towards the Sri Lankan government, and
proposed that all Tamil associations in the EU organize
peaceful demonstrations.


6. (SBU) Comment: The Sri Lankan media reacted predictably
to news of the E.U. ban on travel. English and Sinhala
press responded very positively to the E.U. decision but
called upon the international community to continue to
intervene for the success of the peace process. The Sinhala
press resisted its usual proclivity for lashing out in
aggressive phrasing against the LTTE, instead praising the
move while hoping for an EU FTO ban as well. The U.K.'s Tony
Blair, with his country holding the EU presidency, received
credit for the ban and for allegedly bypassing purported
Norwegian objections. The Tamil press played the victim
card, blaming the Sri Lankan government for unfairly biasing
the international community against the Tamil struggle in an
underhanded move, and hinting at a return to violence if
these moves continued. We will continue to monitor Sri
Lankan media reaction to events affecting the peace process.
End Comment.


Lunstead