An Apology and Brief Response to Dayan Jayatilleka
by Nalin Swaris
1. I withdraw my insinuation about Dayan Jayatilleka not being offered some fitting position. It was speculative and unkind. My sincere apologies.
2. The sour grapes title was in question form and related to Dayan’s recent criticisms of the President prior to his departure to Singapore , which he kept announcing.
Whatever the critcisms about Sarath Fonseka’s arrest and choice of military tribunal, if Fonseka’s allegations about war crimes is not cleared Dayan’s own labour at the Human Rights Council will be lost.
3. Hopefully at the ‘breakfast meeting’ DJ may have been told why he was so unceremoniously removed from office. This, notwithstanding that one retired seniour diplomat, seniour lawyers and the editor of the Island urging that he be retained at least till his term expired.
4. I am puzzled by “examples of [my] conduct which DJ says he“ would not choose to emulate or uphold”. If it refers examples of my political behaviour, as opposed to any private conduct, I must say that the only politician with whom I had close contact, was Chandrika Kumaratunga before she was elected President. I was as appalled as Victor Ivan was about how she started abusing the peoples’ trust. After she came to power I did not try contact her and did she did not contact me.
5. The comparion between J.R.Jayewardene’s two terms in office and what Fonseka is alleged to have done is like comparing apples and pears. The J.R legacy is systemic, especially the constitution he wrote for himself to enthrone despotism. I have called the Executive Presidency attracts the corrupt like a dung heap attracts blue bottles. All Presidents, including President Rajapakse - Wijetunga being perhaps an exception - have used this power to rule despotically. Criticising JR’s executive presidency in the Island ’s Midweek Review, I quoted Adam Ferguson’s observation: “The rules of despotism are made for the government of corrupted men.”
Any steps Fonseka may have taken for a putsch - a one time attempt - have been nullified according to what the Defence Secretary said n the ITN interview. There are no signs of a mutiny yet, in the armed forces and police as Fonseka threatened, if the President tried to remain in power after being defeated by him. 90 % of the forces and police are with him, he said.
6. There are no signs either of a popular wave in support of Fonseka resurging. Daily revelations have taken the sheen of his campaign promise to end corruption and State violence. His credibility on both has been seriously damaged. The joint opposition has fragmented along several fissure lines.
7. The decision about the proper tribunal is a question of jurisdiction. If he was tried by a civil court, the defence could have argued the other way around as well: the offences were committed while Fonseka was a serving officer; a civil court does not have the jurisdiction to try him, since military law is also Lankan law which recognises civil and military jurisdictions and delimits the competence of each. The judge might have agreed and dismissed the case. I am not a practicing lawyer to give a grounded legal opinion, but to return to a military tribunal after that might have involved double jeopardy.
8. My response about the comment about “black masks” related to possible identification of the men as TV camera crews were present. Whether a battle was raging at the Bombay Taj and whether there was none outside the Colombo Lakeside Cinnamon is not the issue. The issue was exposing identities.
9. My remark about a strange and possible Westward tilt by Jayatillaka had to with pressure, even attempts to interfere, by the US and EU in Lanka’s internal affairs. This has not changed. Jayatillaka himself urged that it be counterbalanced by strengthening ties with India , Pakistan China and Russia .
I follow what is published in the journals Dayan mentions. The correct contrast should have been not with Asian media but with Asian governments. They have brought no pressure or threatened Sri Lanka with sanctions. In fact, the Asian countries on the Human Rights Council voted for Ambassador Jayetillaka’s Resolution, and against the German resolution which had the support of the US and EU countries. Support for Lanka was due in part to Dayan’s excellent persuasive powers. His removal is the country’s loss.
10. I have not changed my view about the shabby treatment of Dayan. It was a public humiliation he did not deserve. So many of us were outraged, especially as no reason was given, as Dayan himself stated in the Groundviews video interview.
The main reason for writing this response is to apologise for my uncalled for insinuation. My current difference with Dayan is on a specific issue. It not an “antagonistic contradiction” Hopefully we can let the matter rest.
Thanks to Dayan for publishing this in 'expressive' mode rather than being too intellectual. I also agree with the content of the last para with out reservations. It is time for the western democracies to realise, lip service to 'liberalism' alone is not enough to sustain stable societies.
Related: Who are we? A matter of identity: Response to Dr. Nalin Swaris
11 Comments
I think Dr. Nalin Swaris has compared comments to his post that with comments on Dr. DJ's response and found that his bluff has been called.
I am curious to know more about Dr. Swaris. Could Dr. Swaris give a rundown of his credentials?
You have made many uncalled insinuations about General Fonseka as well!
What about the shabby treatment of General Fonseka?
When are you going to offer an unconditional apology to General Fonseka?
Max,
Dr.Nalin Swaris is one of the few intellectuals involved in Human Rights advocacy in Sri Lanka.
He holds a Ph.D in Social Science from Utrecht University , The Netherlands.
Who is this?
Dayan should just ignore him.
Dayan has acted well within reason. He wholly backed the campaign to defeat the tigers, but since then he has been appalled by the dirty games being played.
A General who appeared in many media after the war and saluted the president and the Defence Secretary for their whole hearted support to the troupes went on to speak things completely opposite to what he uttered few weeks ago when he announced that he is contesting the president. Can this kind of double tongue people can be given any serious responsibility. SF conduct within the military has been a disaster from the day one. He hung in the Army because he had nowhere else to go. He rose his ranks only due to seniority. No government or Army Commander trusted him. If not for MR he would have been only another number. Anyway government has a legal responsibility to hold a military or civil enquiry to establish fact. If he has done anything wrong he should be penalised to the maximum because he has been a higher officer.
Dr.Suwaris' insinuation that 'absence of a revolt with in the Army' to be that of no following or sympathies with SF is 'baby talk' to say the least and shows his total lack of 'military reading'!
Sri Lanka Military is not used to behave like in Pakistan or like countries where military revolts have taken place,which is a good sign but some actions of the Govt, after the questionable presidential elections have left the army in total confusion & demoralized with very many decent officers being moved out and thank god that Prabhakaran is not there today!
If not, we would have to reinstate SF to deal with him!
What a U turn by Dr. Nalin Swaris. I'm sure he envys Dayan Jayatilleke now.
Dayan is out of the country with well paid job. Dayan has more freedom now and has gone up statuswise (both socio-politically and economically ) and is going to have a good network to deny the Tamils their traditional habitats under unitary SL.
I'm sure Dr.Swaris would like to follow suite and join his Nationalist cronies like Dayan,Rohan and others in the ever swelling Sinhalese Diaspora. Sinhalese intellectuals in SL and overseas attack the Tamil Diaspora for most of the political problems in SL. But actually the majority of the Sinhalese Diaspora together with the support of SL missions overseas,and with the support of some foreign governments are all out to suppress the progress the Tamil Diaspora has been making in their adapted countries.
Why for the last three decades ( leaving out the post Sinhala only period between 1956 and 1983 ) the intellectuals ( with the exception of few like Brian )or groups, never pressured or lobbied the SL governments to go for political solutions under unitary status and thus isolate the LTTE ? Because majority of them believe in Mahavamsa and the whole country belong to them.JHU is an integral part og the regime. Majority of the Sinhalese were happy when JR regime's agenda of 1983 was succeesfully impleneted. Tamils were told " duvepala demolo duvepla ". The majority elects eithe SLFP led governments or UNP led governments.
Now after we Tamils "duveppu " they waited for the triumphalism of the Sinhalese regime ( Victor Ivan stated that Mahinda represents the Sinhalese ) over the Tamils and by capturing and occupying their villages and schools, they are all out to suppress the Tamil Diaspora which tries to follow the non SL style democracy in their adapted countries. The younger gneration of Tamil diapora are begining to realise the existential need of their community with dignity. Unfortunately majority of the Sinhalese diaspora are working behind the scene to consolidate Mahinda regime's triumph and paving the way for autocracy so that the minorities can not claim back their sovereignty and all their occupied homes, villages and schools through even proper democratic channels.
So Dr.Swaris wants the cordial relationship he had with Dayan to to continue.If not at least to forge a common agenda ( like successive UNP, SLFP led governments ) of bullying the Tamils in SL as well as overseas through their net work.
Comment 3 by Douglas.. “Dr.Nalin Swaris is one of the few intellectuals involved in Human Rights advocacy in Sri Lanka.”-- Holly crap this is a HUMAN RIGHTS advocate.. someone who claims that the way to “clear” the record on war crimes is to take out the accuser, someone who is all for court martialing an army general, the most decorated in SL history at that, purely on political grounds (we are yet to hear of the actual accusations against him, during service or after even though Swaris and the crony gang have jumped on the bandwagon to destroy Fonseka) and someone who claims Dayan Jayathilake is western leaning because he expects some basic standards in governance.. wow Sri Lanka is in deed a land like no other. I’m still trying to get over the news that this fellow is a Human rights advocate.. tell the truth Douglas was that some kind of sad joke?..with human rights advocates like this why do we need liberals.. I think Swaris must read 1984 he might find some familiar characters..
Also interesting is Swaris’s last line.. “It is time for the western democracies to realise, lip service to 'liberalism' alone is not enough to sustain stable societies.” Is this human rights activist actually asking for the western states to intervene and establish the rule of law, democracy, freedom of expression and pluralism in Sri Lanka or is he expecting western liberal democracies to enact sanctions against us.. Please do explain what actions a liberal democracy should take against pariah states like Myanmar, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka rather than offering lip service.. Dayan is looking like a real star to those he left behind in defence of the Maharaja.
Who is this character Nalin Swaris and where was he all this time.. just as one stooge finally saw the futility of his cause and bowed our with some dignity we now have another battalion wanting to replace him. Dayan has set an example for these mercenaries as to what they can gained when they whitewash their political masters.
For all his biases and misguided socialist logic Dayan at least had substance. He could formulate an argument in away that would at least attempt to hide the ridiculous subject matter. He argued quite fluently why certain rights can be forgotten when fighting a war even though the consequences of such actions were blatantly clear. This Nalin Swaris character seems to be getting lost in his own logic. At one point Dayan is a hero and then when he points out some deficiency in the state he’s a western thinker. At one point he says that western liberal democracies are only playing lip service to the values they represent without clarifying whether we aspire to any other set of values other than those of a liberal democracy. Please do enlighten us whether Myanmar or China is a better model for us to emulate?
The best barometer to identify logically bankrupt analysts in Sri Lanka is to see how soon they call their opponents traitors, Colombo elites, western thinkers, NGO karayas etc. Anyone who has a different opinion to that of the current regime just has to be one of these categories. It is not even remotely possible that these people might actually just want something else for Sri Lanka, a country that has some semblance of good governance and democracy. No way that would be western thinking, like Dayan!
Nalin Swaris please remember you are not the defining authority on patriotism. If you were even you cannot be that stupid to suggest that a man who had fought for his country for 40 years, got injured in battle three times and has for once delivered on a promise to the motherland doesn’t become a traitor and an enemy of the state overnight because he has a different political ideology. If you are vying to replace Dayan as the principle bootlicker of the Rajapaksa regime at least try to keep up to his intellectual level or else stop embarassing yourself.
Dr. Jayathilake you should not engage like this. It’s better for all concerned when we can have a debate which actually enriches our understanding and gives a better comprehension of the issues rather than a lengthily lecture based on utter rubbish devoid of argument.
like this Nalin Suwaris should be ignored so that readers do not waste their time on nonproductive cacophony. Let others who have some substance and intelligence argue the case for the ruling party.
I miss DJ already. At least his warped and twisted arguments made some sense at the end of the day and for a moment made you think before realising that he's giving excuses for the government. This Swaris person is just all sound and no solid. He is dumbing down the pro-government case even further.