By P.K. Balachandran, IANS
Colombo : Foreign ministers of five Nordic countries, which had contributed truce monitors to Sri Lanka, have claimed that the ceasefire agreement (CFA), which the Sri Lankan government abrogated earlier this week, had saved an estimated 10,000 lives in the first three years of its existence.
“The ceasefire agreement had a number of positive consequences. During the first three years, conflict-related casualties dropped to almost zero, which means that as many as 10,000 lives may have been spared,” the ministers said in a joint statement issued in Oslo Friday.
The signatories to the statement were: Jonas Gahr Store of Norway, Ingibjorg Solrun Gisladottir of Iceland, Per Stig Moller of Denmark, Carl Bildt of Sweden and Ilkka Kanerva of Finland.
“The (Sri Lankan) government allowed for greater freedom of movement for all people in Sri Lanka and opened for economic development. It also improved the human rights situation and protection of civilians,” they said about life under the CFA with monitoring by the Scandinavian-staffed Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM).
The foreign ministers said the other positive contribution of the CFA was that it was the basis for an international involvement in the Sri Lankan peace process.
However, the Nordic leaders acknowledged that violations of the agreement had been “particularly numerous and increasingly serious” during the past two years.
The foreign ministers said: “The Nordic countries are deeply concerned about the worsening situation in Sri Lanka, an overall development which now has reached the point where one party terminates the agreement.
“The decision (to withdraw from the pact) comes at a time when the government and the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) are engaging in high level hostilities in a war-like situation with large scale displacement of civilians and repeated violations of human rights.”
“The Nordic countries are worried that the violence and human suffering will now further escalate. The withdrawal of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission will mean the end of an important mechanism that protected civilians and gave a voice to the victims and their families.
“The Nordic countries believe that only a political solution that addresses the grievances of all ethnic groups in the country can provide a sustainable peace. The termination of the ceasefire agreement will only make it more difficult to find a way back to the negotiating table,” they added.
Simultaneously, in New York and London, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Minority Rights Group (MRG) demanded that UN or international monitors be posted in Sri Lanka to independently monitor rights abuses, which they feared would mount with the abrogation of the truce pact, the exit of the monitors, and the consequent escalation of the conflict.
“The Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission was deeply flawed, but its monitors helped minimise abuses against civilians. Now the need for a UN monitoring mission is greater than ever,” said Elaine Pearson, deputy Asia director of the New York-based HRW, which had been vigorously campaigning for the establishment of a field office of the UN Commissioner for Human Rights in Sri Lanka.
“There is now going to be a greater void in monitoring and reporting of human rights abuses in the conflict zone,” said Mark Latimer, director of the London-based MRG.
“The need for international human rights monitors is now more crucial,” he added.
However, the Sri Lankan government has been totally opposed to UN monitoring, especially the establishment of a UN office in the country, for that purpose.
The Sri Lankan Minister for Human Rights Mahinda Samarasinghe and Sri Lankan diplomats have been telling the world that the establishment of such an office will violate Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.
They say Sri Lanka has rights monitoring and redressing mechanisms in place, but these may need improvement and the UN and other international organisations are welcome to play a role in bringing about improvements.