The U.S.
wanted the ouster of Rajapaksa because of its orientation to China which was an
obstacle to Obama's Asia Pivot policy.
Those who
worked very closely with American foreign service officers (FSOs) from the
eighties through the turn of the millennium were aware that the United States
never wanted the secessionist Tamil Tiger movement totally annihilated; it
wanted it to be a 'pressure group' to check the Sinhalese chauvinistic
tendencies of Sri Lanka, and maintain Sri Lanka within the American orbit which
promotes 'US Designs' in South and East Asian region.
The
Rajapaksa administration was an obstacle to American interests in the region,
and 'democracy' and 'good governance' were the least the U.S. was interested.
The U.S.
had a taste during the 2001-2004 era when Ranil Wickremasinghe occupied the
position of premiership; his government was clearly serving the American
interests; made Sri Lanka's premier international airport available for the US
to implement its prisoner rendition program transporting 'enemy combatants' to
CIA Black Sites for enhanced interrogation - meaning torture - when even India
refused that facility to the U.S.; sided with the U.S. at Doha Round of Talks
against the wishes of the developing Third World nations; tacitly approved the
Norwegian-engineered Peace Treaty (CFA) with Tamil Tigers in 2002 which helped
the Tigers to strengthen itself militarily for later use.
The state
department maintained an unusual cohabitation with the secessionist Tamil
advocates and activists to destabilize the Sri Lanka state since the defeat of
the Tigers through 2014 using the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva
sponsoring several resolutions.
Obviously
the U.S. wanted the Rajapaksa administration out to pave the way for Ranil
Wickremasinghe - not really Maitripala Sirisena - to bring Sri Lanka into the
American orbit.
The country
was moving forward despite certain authoritarian tendencies of the Rajapaksa
regime which has since retarded due to uncertainty in the nation's governance.
Instability has crept in the way following the pattern emerged in Iraq, Libya
and Afghanistan when regimes were changed at the behest of the United States.
It was
clearly manifested that Saddam Husain and Gaddafi exercised authoritarian power
in their respective nations. Nevertheless, there was domestic stability in both
Iraq and Libya, and external stability in the region. We see none since the
US-doctored regime changes.
It is true
that the Rajapaksa regime had authoritarian tendencies but there was stability
within the nation while certain cautious attitude was taken in monitoring
secessionist elements within the Global Tamil Diaspora who had moved closer to
foreign policy handlers in Western Capitals.
The US
ignores democracy and rule of law in countries strategically important to its
foreign policy objectives and national security concerns. The CIA overthrew
Mossadegh's democratically-elected government in 1953 and installed the
authoritarian Shah Reza Pahlavi for economic reasons. It overthrew the
Indonesian regime in 1965 to install a dictator for strategic reasons.
Former
Chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee John Kerry in his
December 2009 senate report on Sri Lanka warned the Obama administration that
Sri Lanka is in a strategic location in the India Ocean for the United States
to cultivate her friendship.
The calculated move to dislodge the
Rajapaksa regime was in the strategic interest of the U.S. in the Indian Ocean
region. But the collateral damage is felt within the perimeters of Sri Lanka.
Asian Tribute article summarized:
Thank you Asian Tribute for
the excellent article!
No comments:
Post a Comment