Friday, August 26, 2005

government picks another losing fight.

by insisting that the negotiations with the ltte be held in sri lanka, government is again trying its best to score a own goal.

lets just examine the logic(or rather the lack of it) behind this demand.

are they saying that the norwegians cannot be trusted? that ltte is going to be favored, and our negotiators will be manipulated in to giving more than they would have, just because they are in a foreign country?

if the government really thinks norwegians cannot be trusted, it should dismiss them as facilitators after coming to a arrangement with the co-chairs for a replacement before any negotiations, instead of insulting them indirectly (btw if i was a norwegian involved in this peace process, by now i would have nothing but personal loathing and contempt for this government).

isn't the government gratuitously implying that ltte has already won the sympathy of the international community when probably the opposite is true?

and are we to believe government doesn't have tough negotiators who cannot be manipulated?

if the government believes ltte gets help in some covert ways (e.g. by being coached in negotiating tactics , by getting access to our team's internal discussions etc. if such things really do happen) aren't there time tested methods to counteract them, with or without help from others?

arguments about monetary cost are not worth any consideration .

only charitable interpretation(on behalf of the government's intelligence) is that this is a pointless delaying tactic.

in fact i believe this insistence on sri lanka as the the location has nothing to do with any of the above, but is just the latest example of government's habit of shooting from the hip in search of (temporary) popularity.

result will be a ignominious climb down (in the face of ltte's inevitable opposition on security grounds) and a general feeling of distrust for the outcome of negotiations when they do take place somewhere else.

btw if the negotiations take place in 'uncleared' areas as some unconfirmed reports say government might agree to , i fail see how that can be better than a foreign country?

why does the government continue to pick stupid fights it will certainly lose? aren't there anyone inside who can prepare a comprehensive strategy and a game plan for the negotiations including for the attendant spin, using the sort of management techniques that are being used in corporate world for instance? where is mr. danapala and the peace secretariat ?

will there be an end to all this bungling after the presidential election?

9 comments:

indi said...

Oh would you shut the fuck up! Dumb asswart.

Electra said...

i just passed you a book baton! totally irrelevant comment, sorry. :)

indi said...

uh, i actually didn't leave that comment above.

I'm not even sure they'll have peace talks before the election, but I dunno

sittingnut said...

indi: about the comment i thought so too.

about the talks we can only wait.

electra: no need to apologize.

sittingnut said...

every body is free to comment, but please don't use other ppls names.

NG said...

umm...think you missed the point as to why the govt does not want to hold negotiations outside SL, its because that would shift focus away from the LK killing..not that that matters anymore after CBK praised Ranil's peace process to spite Mahinda. And no nothing will change after the election because we only have a choice between a moron and an idiot...oh well..

btw rexamine ur point about "government gratuitously implying that ltte has already won the sympathy of the international community when probably the opposite is true." Looking at the how the EU treats the LTTE compared to other 'terrorist' organisations the answer should be obvious...

sittingnut said...

ng: the point of the post was that since government will lose the location debate anyway, it would have been better to pick a fight on something that really matter and can win.
sri lankans have seen enough killings and their aftermath to know that assassinations are easily forgotten. that is a hard fact of life.
whether or not eu favors the ltte is not the question here, it is whether the government accept that as a fact. anyway eu almost banned the ltte last week.

ng said...

“Lets just examine the logic (or rather the lack of it) behind this demand” – It was in response to this statement that I mentioned the motive of highlighting LK’s killing as a significant issue, something that you did not mention. I believe this issue with the location of the talks is something that really matters and is one the government should actually for once stand up to the LTTE instead of its usual tactic bending over backwards for them. Incidentally can somebody please explain to me why the hell the LTTE supremos have SL passports when they don’t recognize SL sovereignty?

“Isn’t the government gratuitously implying that ltte has already won the sympathy of the international community when probably the opposite is true” – How exactly is the opposite true? Yes the EU almost banned the LTTE, after 15 years or so of terrorism. Are we to wait another 15 years until they finally decide to ban them? What about Canada, that other haven of terrorism, despite the CSIS’s continued warnings about the nature of the LTTE and their operations in Canada nothing has been done. Anton flits around London despite his links to the LTTE and the ban on them in the UK. Makes you wonder whether he was honest on his immigration questionnaire when he filled it out (the part about having engaged or affiliated with terrorist organizations). Yes unfortunately for us a number of countries in the international community do sympathize with the LTTE. LK was the only one to effectively combat this and he paid the price.

“..assassinations are easily forgotten. that is a hard fact of life.” – why should we accept that, for once maybe we should not forget this assassination especially considering the timing and the prominence of the person assassinated. Don’t forget WWI started because of one ‘insignificant’ assassination.

sittingnut said...

ng:
government should actually for once stand up to the LTTE instead of its usual tactic bending over backwards for them - i agree. only there is no point in standing up for this particular issue if you are going to lose anyway.

why the hell the LTTE supremos have SL passports -you will have to ask them!

How exactly is the opposite true? Yes the EU almost banned the LTTE - need i say more? btw eu is not all of international community. my main point was, that the government gratuitously implying that international community favors ltte, won't get it anywhere.

why should we accept that - what we as individuals think has nothing to do with it. it's what country as a whole think(and it has already forgotten) that matters.

Don’t forget WWI started because of one ‘insignificant’ assassination. - yes, but would anybody at the end of ww1 go to war for such a flimsy reason?