The Peace Secretariat affirms its appreciation of the manner in which HE Dominic Chilcott, High Commissioner for Britain, responded to newspaper queries re an interview SCOPP Secretary General had given to a foreign news agency. The report indicated criticism of the British government, in its use of the word Britain, which may have created misconceptions of the good relations between our two countries. In fact, the interview had concentrated on misrepresentations by some Non-Government Organizations in which Britishers had played a prominent role. SCOPP also welcomed the High Commissioner’s reiteration of the good relations between SCOPP and the High Commission.

In this regard SCOPP regrets an error in that the greatest distortions were in fact the responsibility of the Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists who it has subsequently found out is Australian. Though the report by a British QC also contained some grave unsubstantiated allegations against Sri Lankan forces and officials, the publication of inflated allegations was the responsibility of the ICJ Secretary General. His further attempts in discussion with the Sri Lankan delegation in Geneva to belittle the Australian expert on whom he had earlier relied is at marked odds with the immensely helpful approach to this problem of the Australian government.

The question of the British researcher for Human Rights Watch who entered the country to engage illegally in work remains, but SCOPP accepts fully that the British government is not responsible for such aberrations. SCOPP also regrets the assumption that it argued that the British government wished to replace the Norwegians in the role of facilitation. Though this may have been contemplated in the past, not necessarily by Britain, any suggestions recently as to the need for a new facilitator came from representatives of NGOs. In this contest SCOPP notes that, in such discussion, it rejected arguments that the Norwegian facilitators had been biased, and has pointed out that any apparent deficiencies in this regard may have arisen from the approach of the earlier Sri Lankan government.

SCOPP would like to affirm too its confidence, with regard to recent allegations about British training of potential LTTE policemen, that the British government would as a matter of principle not have engaged in such activities without the encouragement of its Sri Lankan counterpart. In any case indications that the programme took place not in Britain but elsewhere suggest that recent critiques of official British aid programmes are not at all warranted. Rather SCOPP hopes that, in full consultation with the Ministry of Defence, the British government will continue to assist in relevant programmes as designed to fulfill ongoing national needs. The Secretary General has made it clear that he believes defence policies of an earlier Sri Lankan government were not in accordance with national needs, but that is a Sri Lankan problem for which it is absurd to criticize foreign governments.

SCOPP does worry that some pronouncements of some British politicians, particularly in the recent debate in the House of Commons, are congruent with the desires of the LTTE and of some elements in the Sri Lankan opposition. It recognizes, as does Britain when faced with similar differences of opinion within Sri Lanka, which in a democracy opinions must be free. Personal predilections or political priorities cannot be criticized on the grounds of principle, provided they do not lead to actions that are improper. Indeed a careful reading of the actual debate in the House of Commons, as presented in a recent publication on the subject, suggests that even members of parliament responding to electoral considerations tried to make clear their total abhorrence of terrorism. It is the duty then of the Sri Lankan government to ensure that information regarding terrorist activity as well as humanitarian measures taken by the government are more widely publicized.

SCOPP looks forward to continuing cooperation with the British High Commission in Colombo, as well as other branches of the British government, in programmes to promote the peace process. In particular it believes that concerted efforts in language and information technology training, particularly for professionals involved in security work, will help to bring the communities together and increase minority involvement in security operations. The Ministry of Defence has made clear this is required, in particular for the peaceful rebuilding of the Eastern Province, and we hope Britain will contribute actively in this regard.

Rajiva Wijesinha
Secretary General
Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process