Index 
 Previous 
 Next 
 Full text 
Document stages in plenary
Select a document :

Texts tabled :

RC-B6-0471/2006

Debates :

PV 07/09/2006 - 11.1
CRE 07/09/2006 - 11.1

Votes :

PV 07/09/2006 - 12.1
CRE 07/09/2006 - 12.1

Texts adopted :


Verbatim report of proceedings
Thursday, 7 September 2006 - Strasbourg OJ edition

11.1. Sri Lanka
Minutes
MPphoto
 
 

  President. – The next item is the debate on six motions for resolutions on Sri Lanka.(1)

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE), author. Mr President, I welcome the opportunity to speak this afternoon, but regret the need to do so because it seems not very long ago that this Parliament adopted a resolution on the situation in Sri Lanka. Since then, we have seen a return to, or a continuation of, the destruction, the deaths, the displacement of people, and indeed the recurrence of bloodshed in a way that all of us in this House would have hoped would have ceased by now.

I am sure that every one of us in this Chamber wants an end to the bloodshed and that we want a peaceful settlement in Sri Lanka. We may disagree about the path we should take, but we are united on that goal as this resolution makes clear. As our resolution says, the fact that there is no peace settlement is due to intransigents on both sides who trample on the aspirations of the majority and who are so concerned with their own role, their own future, their own vision of Sri Lanka that they are unwilling to let forces wanting peace work to that end.

The European Union now has to find its own way forward. For some of us, placing the LTTE on the terrorist list has led to a totally predictable reaction and the SLMM is no longer able to operate at full force or as effectively as we would want. Nevertheless, we still have to move forward. We have to look for the resumption of peace negotiations. We have to participate in those as fully as we are able and with all the contacts that we have in order to find a way forward, so that we can get on with distributing the tsunami aid properly and look to a peaceful future for all.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marcin Libicki (UEN), author. – (PL) Mr President, this is not the first time we have addressed this issue, and we are aware that Sri Lanka has frequently been the subject of debate in the House.

We have already referred to historical matters, and I have certainly spoken recently on the difficulties related to our need to take a stand on the situation of the parties to the conflict. On the one hand there is the continuing harm befalling all those who are victims of these conflicts, while on the other hand we cannot forget that specific past circumstances are affecting the present. We cannot automatically assume that these people are simply unfortunate and cursed by blind fate.

It is necessary to accept a particular definition as to who in Sri Lanka – and I hesitate to resort to such controversial terms, but here goes – is the original host there, and who is the guest who has become too big for his boots, and whose activity is detrimental to the host. I do not wish to name individuals or refer to any particular side or party, but I would like point out that the present situation cannot be judged without a specific analysis and judgment of earlier events and without some basis for dividing people into aggressors and victims. After all, you cannot just simply label every victim as innocent and anyone who is on top as guilty at that particular moment. Of course, we as an international organisation should obviously ensure first and foremost that the sufferings of ordinary people stop as soon as possible, but we cannot do so without taking account of the historical context, and of a certain understanding of who are the goodies and who are the baddies. It seems to me this House needs to take considerably more action than it has hitherto.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), author. (NL) Mr President, after decades of warfare and intensive mediation on the part of the Norwegians, successive Sri Lankan Governments have declared their willingness to work towards an agreement with the rebel Tamil Tigers, with the possibility of a confederation preventing the central government from intervening in the democratic administration of the autonomous north-east around Jaffna. This good intention has, unfortunately, become the subject of political disputes within the Sinhalese population, some of whom believe that the Tamil rebels should be made to content themselves with less, and the divided state of the majority population undermines the minority’s faith in the possibility of a peaceful resolution.

For as long as the Tamil minority cannot rely on political agreement among the Sinhalese majority or on its earlier promises, we cannot expect it to sit patiently and wait for something to be offered to it. In the meantime, both parties have gone back to violence. Europe must be consistent in not taking either side, instead doing everything possible to foster peace and conciliation.

Although the rebel organisation LTTE is not banned within Sri Lanka, it has, since May 2006, been on the European Union’s list of terrorist organisations, and this is something to be regretted in that it makes negotiations more difficult and encourages the perpetuation of violence. Putting an organisation on the list of terrorist organisations is an indication that it is not one to be negotiated with and that every effort is to be made to stamp it out.

We have known for many years that it will not be possible to wipe the LTTE out or exclude them, even if we wanted to do so. That is why talks have been going on with them for so many years. We need them if there is to be reconciliation and peace. That is why we must do everything in our power to bring an end to the despair that has driven them to again resort to violence.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Neena Gill (PSE), author. Mr President, I should like to condemn strongly the recent spate of violence in Sri Lanka. At the weekend government patrol boats engaged Tamil Tiger rebels in the northern seas. This marks yet another outbreak of violence between government forces and the rebel movement but, as we know, violence is not the way to resolve complex and sensitive conflicts.

Ever since the Tamil Tigers were classified as terrorists by the Council, the situation in Sri Lanka has worsened. The labelling of this group has undoubtedly driven that movement further away from the negotiating table. My approach as chairwoman of Parliament's Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation is that both parties should be brought together and both held equally responsible for the recent violence. Neither side can be immune from blame, and both must accept responsibility.

The Sri Lankan Government has failed to adopt a measured approach to the rebel threat. It must be careful not to adopt the terrorist approaches currently associated with the rebel movement it so violently pursues.

The targeting of schools and hospitals in northern Sri Lanka is not the action of a responsible, democratic and peace-seeking government. As we all know from other terrorist flashpoints in the world, the root causes of any conflict need to be analysed closely. We need to deal with the causes of the conflict. The heavy-handed approach adopted by the government does not help address these root causes.

Let us not forget that many people have lost their lives, including 17 EU nationals working as aid monitors. No longer can we tolerate violence against innocent people, aid agencies, NGOs and monitors in the region. It is time for good sense and negotiation to prevail in Sri Lanka.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE), author. Mr President, Sri Lanka is a beautiful country, located at a key economic crossroads, with an enterprising and industrious people. What a terrible shame that the hopes and ambitions of a generation of Sri Lankans have been blighted by terrorism. Sri Lanka has made progress in recent years; how much more could have been achieved in terms of rapid economic and social development if there had been stability and security?

I do not want to underestimate the strength of feeling among many Tamil citizens, in particular, that they were not getting a fair deal, but we can be certain that terrorism has not improved their opportunities one iota. The Tamil-speaking population is very mixed. Of a population of four million, one quarter or so are so-called hill Tamils, who have never been associated with the LTTE, while a further quarter are Muslims, who certainly find little attraction in the LTTE. Most of the Tamil peoples of Sri Lanka live in the centre and south of the island, outside areas that have been under LTTE control. Those living in those areas have little opportunity to express their true feelings about the terrorist masters who dominate their lives.

I have no doubt that over the years there have been abuses of Tamils and that on occasion security forces have acted with insufficient regard for ordinary Tamil people in the areas of conflict. I therefore congratulate the Sri Lankan Government on the commitment it has made to investigate atrocities and serious human rights violations and to bring the perpetrators to justice. Of course, the greatest human rights violators are the terrorists.

Successive Sri Lankan Governments have sought to improve the situation of the Tamils and have offered various devolutionary proposals that would give the Tamil population considerable autonomy, while preserving the unity of the country. Each of those proposals has been rejected by that same intransigent leadership at the LTTE.

In our resolution today, we are calling upon all parties to the conflict and troubles in Sri Lanka to pull back from the brink. We are calling for an immediate, comprehensive and verifiable end to hostilities, respect for human rights, unhindered access throughout the country for humanitarian workers, and for the Government and opposition in Sri Lanka to come forward with a bold gesture of reconciliation, including constitutional revision, as a matter of urgency.

Meanwhile, the Council, Commission and Member States must redouble their efforts to help bring a stable and just peace to Sri Lanka and restore security and prosperity, and that includes bearing down hard on the agents of terrorism.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Elizabeth Lynne (ALDE), author. Mr President, the end to the violence seems to be further away than ever. One of the reasons for this was the failure to have a second round of the Geneva peace talks, with the LTTE pulling out. Hopes of further talks have been damaged by the Council proscribing the LTTE as a terrorist organisation on 29 May 2006. I am personally pleased that an amendment has been tabled to that effect and I am sorry that it is not in the resolution. The banning of the LTTE only leads to further isolation. They are not permitted to travel, so another Geneva conference is impossible.

We should be realistic here. However much we condemn the terrorist acts by the LTTE – and we do – the government is certainly not blameless. We just have to look at the 17 French aid workers who were killed on 4 August 2006. Evidence points to the government security forces being responsible – we do not know as yet. This incident and all the others perpetrated by the LTTE and the government need further investigation by an independent human rights expert. What I find so reprehensible is that neither the government security forces nor the Tamil Tigers do enough to protect civilians. Persistent uncertainty about what has actually occurred and who is responsible for alleged war crimes and other violations of international law is fuelling fear and panic among the civilian population. We must have a strong, effective monitoring operation, but it must have the support of the government, the LTTE, the United Nations and its members.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Thomas Mann, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. (DE) Mr President, the cease-fire that has been in place in Sri Lanka since 2002 has been broken on repeated occasions; in mid-June, sixty people were killed in the worst attack so far, for which the government declared the LTTE responsible. Workers from the French organisation ‘Action against hunger’ dealing with the damage caused by the tsunami were murdered at the beginning of August, and over 100 people were injured, and 61 killed, in the middle of that month – all of them children and young people – in a massacre suspected to have been carried out by the state's security forces.

This year, 2006, reminds me of 2001, when we were with the SARC delegation in Jaffna and saw the results of the civil war, in the shape of ruined villages, scorched earth, and tens of thousands of bewildered and desperate refugees. In our dialogues with government and opposition, human rights activists, Buddhists and Muslims, we have always put the case for the peace initiative mounted by the Norwegians, who, this year too, tried – and failed – to act as mediators.

It is not acceptable that the fact should be glossed over. It is the LTTE that bears responsibility for the bomb attacks on civilians, for the month-long blockades of drinking water plant and for its own refusal to stop recruiting children as soldiers.

There is, however, good news to report. Two Tamil parties have decided to join the coalition government. The President is willing to allow violations of human rights by the army and police to be investigated, and many people in positions of political responsibility are coming to realise that the Tamil population must be enabled to stop perceiving themselves as second-class citizens. It is to be hoped that there will be more good news of this kind, and less of the horror stories that we heard previously, for that is what Sri Lanka, as one of the oldest democracies in Asia, deserves.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Robert Evans, on behalf of the PSE Group. Mr President, this item on the agenda, as we know, is about debates on breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The situation in Sri Lanka at the moment is tragic, and there have indeed been many breaches of human rights. This motion refers to the work of the Sri Lankan Monitoring Mission. That independent body has blamed the LTTE for the attack on 15 June and, as Mrs Lynne has said, it has blamed the Sri Lankan Government for the murder of the 17 aid workers in Muttur at the beginning of August.

This shows the seriousness of the situation. Regrettably though, some people involved in the debate – not just the one this afternoon, but also others – are trying to assign all the blame to one side or the other. We have to accept that in any conflict situation there is grave fault on both sides, and that the military responses have in many cases been disproportionate. What started out as a little local dispute over water supply has cost hundreds of lives, displaced thousands of people and brought the country to the brink of civil war.

All sides – the LTTE, Colonel Karuna and the Sri Lankan Government – must realise that there can be no military solution and that peace negotiations without preconditions are the only way forward. It is in this spirit that Amendment 5 seeks to keep the negotiations open. Everyone accepts that the LTTE is a player, and yet the EU has effectively washed its hands of negotiations through its proscriptions.

Let me make something clear. Just because I am saying this, and because Mrs Lynne said something similar, as did Mrs Lambert and Mr Meijer, that does not make us terrorists or apologists for terrorism, which we condemn. It just means that we need to keep negotiations open. Equally, we need to do everything we can, as mirrored in Amendment 4, to help the ordinary people of Sri Lanka, who have suffered for so long and need a peaceful solution.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marios Matsakis, on behalf of the ALDE Group. Mr President, tragically the incidents of bloodshed in Sri Lanka continue to occur and the responsibility lies with both Government and Tamil forces. Evidence from the SLMM shows that: Government forces have killed 17 aid workers; the LTTE have bombed a bus, killing 64 civilians; and the Sri Lankan Air Force has bombed a campsite in the north, killing 51 young people.

Whilst in the short term there is an urgent need for an independent commission to investigate the recent disappearances, abductions and extra-judicial executions, in the long term we must repeat the call made by this House in the last resolution for a wide-ranging human rights agreement between the parties involved in the civil war and its facilitation by an effective independent international monitoring mission. The lessons learned from the weaknesses of the SLMM demonstrate that for human rights to be a fundamental building block of a just and enduring resolution of the conflict, that body must have real enforcement mechanisms and unhindered access to both Government- and LTTE-controlled areas.

Let us hope that a political solution that would be acceptable to Sri Lanka’s minority communities will soon be found and that lasting peace and prosperity will replace violence and poverty.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE). – (DE) Mr President, the Sinhalese and the Tamils have lived together in Sri Lanka – also known as Ceylon – for over two thousand years. Before the rise of Rome, before the Caesars, before the birth of Christ, there were Sinhalese kingdoms in Sri Lanka, along with colonies of Tamil kingdoms in southern India, and that is what makes it all the more tragic that, in the twenty-first century in which we are living, the situation there should be so explosive, although it has to be said that we Europeans, in colonial days, made our own contribution to making matters worse through our settlement policy, through the interests of the plantation owners, and much else.

Today, the most vital thing is that we should help to bring matters to a peaceful resolution, and that will be possible only if a distinction is drawn between the terrorists and what actually matters. The terrorists do not want a solution, any more than do the extremists and the people in positions of power, since they derive their power from the ethnic conflict, which is, in itself, perfectly capable of being resolved.

I would like to use the opportunity afforded by our sitting under an Italian president to say that one tremendous model for this is what has been achieved by the Italians and the people of the South Tyrol working together, which has turned out to be beneficial to both sides. Such a model of autonomy benefits not only the minority, but also the majority.

It is, I believe, high time that we start working towards a similar model of autonomy for Sri Lanka, where the situation is so dangerous, and it is for that reason that I welcome this very even-handed resolution, while of course supporting our group's amendment to it. I do, however, think it regrettable that we are, to some extent, giving ourselves over to inter-group ideological warfare instead of this House coming together to present a united front in dealing with this thorny political issue, which would enable us to carry a great deal more weight in our dealings with the participants in the civil war in Sri Lanka.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (PSE) – (PL) Mr President, in recent weeks violent clashes have again taken place in Sri Lanka between Tamil guerrillas and government forces. Over 800 people have died as a result of these brutal acts of violence this year alone. The weak judicial system in Sri Lanka has not reacted to widespread cases of human rights violations, the murder of representatives of humanitarian organisations and the recruitment of child soldiers.

Both parties – the government in Colombo and the Tamil Tigers – accuse each other of being responsible for breaking the agreement. There is a risk of civil war breaking out as a result of the ever-intensifying clashes. Representatives of the UN peacekeeping mission were forced to withdraw from the country on the first of September because the Tamil Tigers were unable to guarantee security. The fact that the burgeoning conflict is hampering economic development by preventing aid from reaching the tsunami victims is particularly worrying.

Particular support must therefore be given implementation of the UN humanitarian aid plan to supplement the funding already earmarked. In the face of this spreading conflict, the international community must appeal to both sides to lay down their arms and start negotiations towards a settlement. Attacks which take their toll on innocent civilians on a daily basis can no longer be tolerated.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Marianne Mikko (PSE). – (ET) Ladies and gentlemen, as a member of our parliament’s delegation of Southern Asian countries, the loss of what has already been achieved in Sri Lanka is an ominous experience for me. The act of terror perpetrated by the Tamil Tigers on 15 June is very regrettable, as is the shooting of aid workers in Muturi by government forces.

In order to be trustworthy partners, the parties must be able to prevent such incidents. Respect for human rights and putting the wellbeing of the population above all else is the only way out of this impasse. The re-establishment of the ceasefire is now the most urgent task, but merely freezing the conflict is not a solution. As the head of parliament’s Moldova delegation, I sense that every day. The frozen conflict there – I refer to the illegal Transnistrian regime – has made Moldova the poorest country in Europe.

Despite the setbacks, the European Union must not lose sight of its long-term objectives. Adding the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) to the list of terror organisations was technically correct, but was the wrong step in practical terms. As a result, the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) lost most of its capability. The European Union must do all in its power to ensure that talks in Sri Lanka are conducted using words, not bullets. This is in our power – it must be.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  Franco Frattini, Vice-President of the Commission. The European Commission is deeply concerned at the growing violence which is seriously unravelling the ceasefire agreement and peace process in Sri Lanka. The intensification of hostilities between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Sri Lankan army that has taken place over the last months is a matter of great concern. A full-scale war has to be avoided at all costs and parties must recommit to respecting the ceasefire agreement.

The Commission has repeatedly called on both parties to make the utmost effort to prevent a further escalation of violence and loss of life. The Commission and the co-chairs of the Tokyo Donor Conference on Sri Lanka have stated many times that violence is not the way to resolve the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka. The suffering inflicted on innocent civilians is intolerable.

The European Commission is very concerned about the deteriorating human rights situation there. We share the concerns expressed in the draft resolution in relation to the recent violations and we are concerned about the climate of impunity and non-respect of human rights by both sides.

The Commission has been particularly shocked by the atrocious killing of 17 aid workers from the NGO 'Action Contre la Faim' and has urged the authorities in Sri Lanka to investigate these killings immediately and thoroughly and to give assurances that they will do everything possible to ensure a safe humanitarian space in the country. The recent call by President Rajapakse for an international independent commission – which we support – is a positive step which will have to be followed up by concrete action.

We continue to follow the situation in Sri Lanka very closely and welcome the interest shown by Parliament in this draft resolution with a view to encouraging both parties to ensure full respect for human rights.

These new developments are important for the European Union in its role as a co-chair of the Tokyo Donor Conference. A co-chairs' meeting will take place in Brussels on 12 September and the European Commission will take an active part in ensuring that a strong message is put across to both parties, urging them to commit to a peaceful negotiated resolution of the conflict and full respect for human rights.

 
  
MPphoto
 
 

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place at the end of the debate.

 
  

(1)See Minutes.

Legal notice - Privacy policy