Colombo, Sri Lanka: Whether the Peace talks between the government and the LTTE recommence or not, both parties are interested in maintaining the Cease fire Agreement (CFA). This is because the CFA is in a critical stage, and the country is moving towards a situation, where a war could break out any time between the Govt and the LTTE.

In this context, due to the failure of the Oslo Talks, there is grave concern regarding CFA and Norway’s role as a facilitator in the peace process.

When the CFA was signed in 2002, it appeared as though it were an agreement between two states. Ranil Wicremasinge, the then Premier signed on behalf of the government, while, the LTTE Leader Velupillai Pirabakaran signed on behalf of the LTTE. In the present context, therefore one has to examine status of the delegation that represented the government at the proposed Oslo talks.

The delegation sent by the government to Oslo Talks did not include any person who has authority to make decisions at the table, whereas the LTTE delegates were clothed with power to determine issues.

The government delegation which participated at the last Geneva talks, held the view that the CFA was not a legal document. Now they have relegated the present talks on the CFA for a discussion at the level of government officials.

In this backdrop, the LTTE suggested the Director of the LTTE Peace Secretariat to hold talks with the Director of the government Peace Secretariat. But that suggestion was turned down. The consequences are serious. There is a set back not only for the CFA but also to the Norway’s role as a facilitator.

It is in the background of the new development, that Norway has posed the following five questions to President Rajapakse and the LTTE Leader Pirabaharan.

1. Will the parties stand committed to the Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) of 22 February 2002?
2. Do the parties want the continued existence and operation of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission as a mission coordinated, facilitated and led by the Royal Norwegian Government with diplomatic immunity to ensure its impartial operation?
3. Are the parties able to provide full security guarantees for all monitors, employees and physical assets of the SLMM in all situations, in accordance with CFA Article 3.9?
4. Will the parties accept amendments to CFA Article 3.5 in order to enable the continued functioning of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission at its current operational levels and with the necessary security guarantees?
5. In the event that amendments to Article 3.5 are made, will the parties provide full security guarantees for current SLMM personnel and assets during a six-month transition phase until an amended solution has been identified, decided and fully implemented?

The destiny of this country depends on the answers to be offered by the two leaders.

English translation of Sunday Vrakesari, a Tamil National Weekly, based in Colombo

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed