FAAE Committee Report

CANADA AND THE CRISIS IN SRI LANKA

Introduction

Conflicts evolve, and by the spring of 2009 the long-running conflict on the island of Sri Lanka had reached a critical phase as a result of a shift in the military balance in favour of government forces.  The respected International Crisis Group explains the background to the current crisis – and the shared responsibility of both the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE or Tamil Tigers) in the conflict - in this way:

Sri Lanka has been wracked by violent conflict for most of the past 25 years, suffering more than 100,000 deaths in conflicts in both the north and south. Successive attempts to resolve the ethnic conflict between Sri Lankan Tamils, who have traditionally inhabited the northern and eastern regions, and Sinhalese, concentrated in the central and southern regions, have been tried since the 1950s, but with no success.

The nature of the main Tamil nationalist organization, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), has made any peace settlement particularly hard. The LTTE has been banned in many countries because of its use of suicide bombers and child soldiers, widespread human rights abuses, and its intolerance of any dissent among Tamils.

Sinhalese-dominated political parties have consistently failed to reach consensus on reasonable power-sharing or devolution proposals that might be acceptable to the majority of Tamils. Party politics has interfered with any common approach to the conflict, and extreme nationalist parties have frequently derailed any attempt to offer concessions. Without a two-thirds majority in parliament – which no single party can achieve under current electoral rules – no constitutional reforms are possible. The LTTE has shown no interest in even the most generous devolution proposals offered by recent governments.[1]

Considering the urgency of the situation and in order to better understand current developments in the conflict, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development held a series of hearings on the humanitarian and related crises in Sri Lanka in March and April 2009. The Committee met with academics, respected NGOs with on-the-ground experience, members of the Tamil, Sinhalese and Tamil-speaking religious communities in Canada, as well as government officials.

The Committee recognizes the complexities of the current situation in that country, which “has been shaped by historical, territorial, and socio-economic forces, including colonialism and party politics and caste issues and religion,” as Professor Bruce Matthews of Acadia University told the Committee.[2] It is also mindful of the emotional and familial connections to the conflict that are a reality for many Canadians and others around the world. Government officials provided the Committee with an overview of Canadian diplomatic and development responses to the current crises in Sri Lanka, and added that Canada “has reiterated that this conflict cannot be resolved militarily and continues to call for a new, meaningful and durable political solution that will address the legitimate aspirations of all the people of Sri Lanka.”[3]  Canada’s Minister of International Cooperation travelled to the country at the beginning of May to communicate the government’s concerns to the Government of Sri Lanka and pledge further assistance.

In light of the evidence it heard, the Committee is convinced of the need for further urgent action by the Government of Canada both with like-minded partners and on its own if necessary to address three interrelated issues: 1) the immediate humanitarian catastrophe in the north of Sri Lanka, which threatens thousands of civilians; 2) the medium-term challenges of reconstruction, resettlement and governance after the current fighting ends; and 3) the longer-term challenges of peacebuilding and political reconciliation following decades of civil war.  While the LTTE deserves much blame for the current situation, Assistant Deputy Minister Ken Sunquist of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) told the Committee at the end of April that “Canada holds the Government of Sri Lanka to a higher standard for its actions and obligations than it would the terrorist organization it is fighting.”[4] The overriding question is, therefore, how best to engage with the Government of Sri Lanka, which throughout the crisis has largely defied international calls for restraint, yet without whose cooperation prosperity and lasting peace in that country will be impossible.

Addressing Urgent Humanitarian Needs

The most immediate and pressing challenge in Sri Lanka is the humanitarian crisis in the north. Following a relentless military campaign that began in late 2007, the Sri Lankan military was reported to be on the verge of totally defeating LTTE by the spring of 2009 – although the fact that the Government of Sri Lanka prevented media and full humanitarian access to the area made confirmation of details difficult.  Witnesses and international observers highlighted the serious impact the current conflict is having on the civilian population. On March 25, Jonathan Papoulidis of World Vision Canada told the Committee that some 150,000 civilians remained trapped in the conflict zone:

Their plight is sure to worsen as the conflict narrows to a smaller stretch of land and measures of resistance become more desperate. Our deepest concern is for the affected children. Hundreds have already been killed and thousands more are cornered and confronted with little possibility of escape.[5]

On March 23, Susan Johnston of the Canadian Red Cross told the Committee that “absolutely the situation is continuing to deteriorate.”[6] She explained that while the Red Cross had both pre-positioned supplies with its partners and had the best access of any humanitarian group to those under threat, it did not have full access to the war zone. She called on Canada to increase its contribution to the work of the Red Cross and partner humanitarian organizations active in Sri Lanka, and added:

We're also looking for the Government of Canada to make it clear to the Sri Lankan government that there is an expectation that the basic tenets of international humanitarian law will be respected, which is to say, civilians should have access to humanitarian assistance. Those in a position to deliver humanitarian assistance should have safe access to those civilians. That is not, in fact, the situation we face today.[7] 

While the LTTE’s call on the international community to broker a ceasefire in February 2009 was rejected by the Government of Sri Lanka as a ploy by the LTTE to buy time to regroup and rearm, most witnesses supported a humanitarian pause to allow humanitarian assistance to reach civilians caught in the fighting. On April 6 the Government of Sri Lanka argued that it had rejected calls for a “humanitarian ceasefire” because they were “unrealistic in the current context of defeating the terrorism of the LTTE and the need to save the civilians being held hostage by it,” and added that “most of these appeals were seen as ill-considered moves, based on pro-LTTE propaganda.”[8] On April 8, Sir John Holmes, the UN’s under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief co-ordinator, wrote in a British newspaper that:

As London witnesses Tamil protests, a bloodbath on the beaches of northern Sri Lanka seems an increasingly real possibility. The Sri Lankan military has pushed the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam into an area so small that any shooting or shelling inevitably causes casualties among the 150,000 to 190,000 civilians trapped in the same zone. There have been many hundreds of civilian deaths caused by firing from both sides, though exact numbers and who fired what and when are impossible to verify. It is clear that the LTTE is refusing to let people flee, though many are managing to escape somehow, and I fear the combatants may be gearing up for a final confrontation. This is a very grave situation.[9]

International pressure for a pause in the fighting to allow humanitarian access to the trapped civilians continued through the United Nations and other fora. On  April 11 Canada, whose High Commissioner in Sri Lanka has chaired meetings of like-minded ambassadors and the United Nations to coordinate humanitarian efforts, again called on both parties to implement a humanitarian pause.[10]  On  April 12 the Government of Sri Lanka unilaterally announced that it would not attack the LTTE over the Sinhalese and Tamil new year period in order to allow civilians to escape the so-called no-fire zone.[11]  While UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon initially welcomed this short pause as a  “useful first step,”  On April 15 the UN’s John Holmes told the press that the ceasefire had been “inadequate,” adding that “it’s clear that 48 hours was not long enough to allow us to get in significant amounts of aid, or indeed to allow visits by humanitarian workers to the area...unfortunately, it is also clear that not only did this not allow more civilians to get out, there seemed to be less civilians getting out during the pause than before.” Holmes criticized the LTTE for not letting civilians go, and the Government of Sri Lanka for not living up to repeated promises not to use heavy weapons in the area. [12]

On April 25, G8 foreign ministers issued a statement to express their deep concern about the mass civilian casualties and deteriorating situation in northern Sri Lanka. On April 29, Canadian government officials told the Committee that the UN estimated that some 50,000 to 100,000 civilians remained trapped in the conflict zone, while many who had escaped the zone were housed in Internally Displaced Person (IDP) camps.  There are mounting problems with these camps, including overcrowding and a shortage of medical personnel to assist some 160,000 IDPs now in the north. Officials added that some 10,000 children now suffer from malnutrition and over 1,500 infants need urgent medical attention. More pointedly, Ken Sunquist of DFAIT told members that, “The Government of Sri Lanka cannot cope with 160,000 people in IDP camps. It will be a mass disaster unless the international community contributes to that.” [13]

The fact that the Government of Sri Lanka prevented access to the conflict zone and rejected calls for a humanitarian pause for months while it tried to achieve a decisive military victory over the LTTE-- and by the end of April was still not issuing visa requests for the replacement of international humanitarian staff -- undoubtedly increased the loss of civilian life in this conflict and made the humanitarian crisis much more dire. The LTTE also deserves much criticism for not letting civilians leave the conflict zone.  

In early May, Canada’s Minister of International Cooperation, Bev Oda, travelled to Sri Lanka to convey Canadian concerns. After meeting with the President and Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka, the minister announced additional Canadian humanitarian assistance of $3 million, which will be provided to the International Committee of the Red Cross, Médecins Sans Frontières, the World Food Program and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. This new pledge, in addition to $4.5 million Canada had already pledged in February, brings Canada’s assistance to civilians in Sri Lanka to $ 7.5 million this year. Minister Oda added that:

This tragic situation for the civilians is of grave concern and our government is responding to the increasing need for assistance... This additional funding will provide essential food, water, shelter and medical care to the displaced populations. We are strongly urging all parties to immediately cease fire and facilitate access for humanitarian workers to give the urgently needed assistance.[14]

The Committee strongly believes that the overwhelming international priority right now in Sri Lanka must be the humanitarian one.

Recommendation 1

The Government of Canada should continue to call upon all parties in Sri Lanka to immediately cease fire and end hostilities.

Recommendation 2

The Government of Canada should redouble its efforts in cooperation with other states to meet the humanitarian needs of all civilians in northeastern Sri Lanka, including those still in the combat zone and those in IDP camps, by securing a sufficient humanitarian pause and through international supervision of assistance.

Assisting Reconstruction and Reconciliation

While the immediate international priority in Sri Lanka must be the humanitarian one, medium and longer-term challenges cannot be forgotten. As Ken Sunquist of DFAIT put it, “The short term is only to make sure that people survive. The long term is what kind of life they’re going to live.”[15]

While most witnesses suggested that the end of the current fighting in the north will not bring an end to the political violence in Sri Lanka, it would mark an important stage in the long running conflict. Jonathan Papoulidis of World Vision Canada told Members:

As we engage in planning for recovery and rehabilitation, we cannot overstate the importance of adjusting to new dynamic and complex realities on the ground. That the Sri Lankan government is now in control of more territory than it has been since the early 1980s carries implications, as well as opportunities, that must be properly understood, managed, and supported for peace and peace building. [16]

Following the end of the fighting and the necessary attention that will have to be paid to immediate humanitarian needs, the Government of Sri Lanka will then be faced with the medium-term challenge of rebuilding communities in the affected area, returning those displaced by the fighting to their places of origin as soon as possible, and administering communities that were until recently under the control of the LTTE.

Similar challenges faced Sri Lanka following the tsunami in 2004, and have existed in the east of the country since the expulsion of the LTTE in 2007. In March 2009 the International Institute for Strategic Studies argued that while some progress has been made in that area, “there is concern over insidious ‘Sinhalisation’ as the displaced are resettled, and this may yet stall internationally led relief and reconstruction operations.”[17] The UN’s John Holmes was more blunt on a recent visit to Sri Lanka, using meetings with the government to underscore “the need to put to rest suspicions of wanting to manipulate the ethnic mix in the north or keeping (Internally Displaced Persons) in long-term camps against their will.”[18] Officials told the Committee that there had been “murmurs” several months ago that the Government of Sri Lanka planned to turn the IDP camps into more permanent “welfare” ones, and that a lot of international pressure had been put on the Government of Sri Lanka to abandon that plan.[19]

Witnesses before the Committee agreed that beyond immediate humanitarian assistance for civilians trapped in the conflict zone and those in IDP camps, Canada should contribute to longer-term reconstruction in Sri Lanka. CIDA officials explained to the Committee that Canada has a long history of development cooperation with Sri Lanka, with a total to date of over $800 million in Canadian assistance. They said that over the past 15 years, CIDA’s bilateral assistance has helped to address the root causes of the conflict,and mitigate its impact on affected communities. Annual funding levels have been $5 million to $6 million, while the recent focus of the program has been to support economic well being. They added that “CIDA's explicit approach is to work through Canadian NGOs and civil society organizations and to maintain a geographic and ethnic balance by supporting projects in the Sinhalese, Tamil and Muslim areas of the country.”[20]