Sri Lanka and Human Rights

Earlier today, I attended part of a conference in North York called “Human Rights and Sri Lanka”. Since The Agenda produced a program on the situation in Sri Lanka in early March (see below), I thought it might be a good idea to attend in order to keep up to date on this difficult conflict. It proved to be an informative experience.  The conference was organized by a group called Canadian Human Rights Voice. Despite a name that implies a general concern for human rights everywhere, a quick visit to the group’s site shows they are clearly a Tamil-dominated organization focused on the plight of Tamils in Sri Lanka. And the vast majority of people at the conference this morning seemed to be from Canada’s large Tamil community.

Nevertheless, even though most of the attendees were clearly sympathetic to the Tamil side of the Sri Lanka civil war, a few different perspectives on how to deal with the conflict emerged.
 
Liberals: A Measured Tone
 
Several current and former Liberal Party politicians were in attendance, including former Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham, current Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic Bob Rae and Parkdale-High Park MP Gerard Kennedy.
 
The Liberals have been accused several times in the past of being too cosy with Canada’s Tamils. Paul Martin was criticized for attending a dinner hosted by a controversial Tamil organization in 2000, and this past February Sri Lanka’s Consul General in Toronto criticized several Liberal MPs for saying that the Sri Lankan government was committing genocide against the Tamil population.
 
However, today the tone from the Liberals in attendance was a measured one. Saying his comments would “not leave everyone (in the room) thrilled”, Rae stated that there is “irrefutable evidence” of breaches of international law by both the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil rebel group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Rae, who has experience dealing with both sides of the Sri Lankan civil war, called on the LTTE “to recognize that the military struggle is over” and to pursue a political solution. He cited the African National Congress, the Irish Republican Army and the Palestine Liberation Organization as groups that gave up arms in order to find a political answer.
 
“There are those who say all of the blame…(is) the fault of only one side,” Rae said at one point. “But that’s not true.”
 
 Other speakers: Not so much
 
The careful speeches of the Liberal Party politicians was contrasted by Dr. Ellyn Shander, an American physician who had done humanitarian work in Sri Lanka’s Tamil areas. Saying many around the world had “turned a blind eye to the (Tamil) genocide,” Shandler disagreed with Rae, arguing that if the LTTE laid down their arms there would be a “bloodbath” of Tamil civilians. This comment was met with applause, as was her call for “Tamil Eelam”, a separate Tamil state in the North and East of Sri Lanka.
 
She was also applauded when she said that while “everyone has blood on their hands,” the LTTE is the only protection against Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his “final solution” for Sri Lanka’s Tamils.
 
Shander also said the Sri Lankan government was in the same “killing club” as Sudan, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and Nazi Germany, and that asking President Rajapaksa to negotiate “is as ridiculous as asking Hitler to stop killing the Jews.”
 
Robert Oberst, a political scientist from Nebraska Wesleyan University, was more subdued in his rhetoric than Shander. But he agreed with her that if the LTTE laid down arms at this point they would be “slaughtered.” He also said that, according to the numbers he’s seen, the Sri Lankan government has been responsible for far more civilian deaths than the LTTE in the recent fighting. 
 
 Jack Layton: Crowd Favourite
 
Federal NDP Leader Jack Layton also made an appearance. While saying that “both sides (in the conflict) must bear some responsibility,” Layton clearly won over many in the audience with his stern criticism of the way the current Canadian government has handled the Sri Lanka file and by detailing his efforts to have the civil war discussed in Parliament. The crowd was respectful and applauded all the speakers at the conference, but I think it’s fair to say that Layton was the Canadian politician whose message was the most well-received. 
 
 The Lone Conservative
 
Newly-minted Conservative MP Paul Calandra (Oak Ridges-Markham) also spoke. He was unapologetic about the government’s decision to designate the LTTE a terrorist organization (not a popular policy with many in the crowd) and essentially argued that Canadian Tamils were best advised to put as much distance between themselves and the LTTE as possible. He also said that both sides in the conflict must be held accountable and that both sides need to be brought to the negotiating table. He received polite applause at the end of his speech.
 
Later on during a break in the proceedings, Calandra got into a lengthy conversation with a group of Tamils who wanted to discuss with him what they saw as foot-dragging by the Harper government on Sri Lanka. What I found interesting about this group was that most of them were young Tamils who had clearly been born in Canada or lived here since childhood. Even though these young people had lived here most — if not all — of their lives, they had an intense passion about the conflict in Sri Lanka, and displayed deep anger at what they believe is decades-long persecution of Sri Lanka’s Tamils by their government.

At one point when Calandra was saying what he felt the role should be of the Canadian Tamil community in solving the conflict, a young man shouted back: “Our role is to protect our people.”
Your take
 
I’d be curious to hear people’s perspectives on my report of this conference. Who among the conference speakers do you agree with the most? 
 
 And if you didn’t see our program on Sri Lanka, here it is: