SRI LANKAN REACTIONS TO NOV. 21 CO-CHAIRS STATEMENT

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001971 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL PTER PHUM PREF MOPS CE SUBJECT: SRI LANKAN REACTIONS TO NOV. 21 CO-CHAIRS STATEMENT This message is sensitive but unclassified. ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Following the November 21 publication of the Co-Chairs' statement, Emboffs spoke to politicians and civil society representatives to gauge the Sri Lankan reaction. In a November 22 speech to parliament, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera thanked the international community and singled out the U.S. as a highly supportive partner on the peace process. Most interlocutors discussing the Co-Chairs' statement appreciated its balanced nature, but expressed concern whether the government would actually take heed and address human rights concerns. Many sought international pressure to bring both the Government of Sri Lanka (GSL) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) back to negotiations. End summary. ¶2. (U) Official GSL reaction to the Co-Chairs' statement of November 21 has been sparse. In a November 22 speech to the Sri Lankan Parliament, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera thanked India and the Co-Chairs (U.S., EU, Japan, and Norway) for being supportive partners of the peace process. Samaraweera gave special thanks to the U.S. for proscribing the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as a terrorist organization and taking law enforcement measures to limit LTTE financing. On November 22, government defense spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella, asked by journalists for his reaction, denied that the Co-Chairs had come down hard on the government. ¶3. (SBU) When Ambassador spoke with Acting Foreign Secretary Geetha de Silva on November 24, she responded carefully that there was "no adverse reaction." However, opposition United National Party (UNP) leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, in a November 24 meeting with Ambassador (septel) welcomed the Co-Chairs' statement, commenting that it was stronger than previous ones. ¶4. (U) The pro-Tamil Tiger (LTTE) website Tamilnet condemned Rambukwella's reported reaction and accused the Government of Sri Lanka (GSL) of ignoring the Co-Chairs' calls for a negotiated political settlement. Tamilnet, citing U/S Burns's comments affirming U.S. support for the GSL, complained that the GSL could complacently ignore the Co-Chairs' statement since international financial and military assistance was continuing. ¶5. (SBU) In separate conversations with pol FSN, Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) member of parliament (MP) Rauff Hakeem, National Unity Alliance deputy leader M.L.A.M. Hizbullah, and Ceylon Workers Congress vice president R. Yogarajan all welcomed the statement's balanced assessment. Hizbullah and Yogarajan hoped the government would take note and open the A-9 road to permit the transport of food and goods to the north. Hizbullah summed up the views of many on the international community's role: "We want peace in this country, and someone must pressure both parties." Similarly, Hakeem said, "We would like precise follow-up action and credible international pressure on both sides to resume dialogue, and we would emphasize the need to address the Muslim dimension in the peace negotiations." ¶6. (SBU) Civil society representatives also welcomed the Co-Chairs statement, but expressed concern about the work of the proposed Commission of Inquiry. Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena of the local NGO Law and Society Trust, citing UN concerns, said, "The possibility exists that the Commission may prove to be ineffective, as with previous Commissions." Many contacts in the NGO community have expressed similar fears. ¶7. (SBU) COMMENT: Thoughtful Sri Lankans generally shared Wickremesinghe's view that the Co-Chairs statement was meatier and more forthright than previous ones. But most also recognized that the Co-Chairs have limited leverage and COLOMBO 00001971 002 OF 002 that the Co-Chairs cannot call the parties together for meaningful negotiations until the SLFP and UNP produce a power sharing proposal that can be tabled for discussion. They also voiced skepticism that the government would take rapid action to improve its human rights record. BLAKE