UN decision to bar SL troops not officially informed - Gen. Atapattu | Sunday Observer

UN decision to bar SL troops not officially informed - Gen. Atapattu

29 September, 2019

The Sri Lanka military has denied that it has been officially informed of a decision taken by the United Nations (UN) to bar the Sri Lankan Peacekeeping forces from being deployed for peacekeeping missions over the country’s new army chief, General Shavendra Silva.

Military spokesman Major General Sumith Atapattu told the Sunday Observer that the decision announced by Deputy UN spokesman Farhan Haq to a foreign media outlet in New York is yet to be officially informed to the Sri Lanka Army through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as is the accepted procedure.

“At present we are not making any preparations to repatriate our troops deployed abroad as we have not been informed of this decision,” he said. Atapattu also questioned if it was ethical to release such a statement without informing the relevant parties through diplomatic channels.

“In light of this appointment, the UN Department of Peace Operations is, therefore, suspending future Sri Lankan Army deployments” Deputy UN spokesman Farhan Haq was quoted as saying.

“A Sri Lankan Army unit and individual officers currently serving with UN Peacekeeping will thus be repatriated, beginning next month, in accordance with their rotation dates and will not be replaced by Sri Lankan personnel,” Haq had said.

Nearly 18,000 Sri Lankan troops have served in UN Peacekeeping missions since 1956. Currently, over 400 Sri Lankan troops are serving in conflict zones across the world. “We have contributed greatly to the Peacekeeping missions,” Atapattu said adding that the Mission in Mali, for example, is a complete humanitarian mission where Sri Lankan troops are tasked with carrying convoys and aid for civilians covering nearly 1,000 Kms. The Sri Lanka Army currently also operates a hospital in Mali.

Meanwhile, two Sri Lankan UN peacekeepers were killed in Mali following an attack on the convoy in January this year. Captain H.W.D Jayawickrama of the 11th Sri Lanka Light Infantry and Corporal S.S Wijekumara of the 1st Mechanised Infantry Regiment were honoured with the Dag Hammarskjöld Medal, which is posthumously awarded by the United Nations to military personnel, police, or civilians who lose their lives while serving in a United Nations peacekeeping operation.

****

UNDPO accused of ‘cherry picking’ on Lankan peacekeepers

The issue of Sri Lankan troops deployed for UN peacekeeping was raised by Foreign Secretary Ravinatha Aryasinha who is presently leading the Sri Lanka delegation to the 74th UN General Assembly Session, when he met Under Secretary General of the United Nations Department of Peace Operations (USSG/UNDPO) Jean-Pierre Lacroix at the UN Headquarters in New York on Friday (27).

At the meeting he had sought clarification on the statement made on September 25, 2019 by the Deputy Spokesman of the UN Secretary General relating to Sri Lankan troops deployed for UN Peacekeeping.

The Under Secretary General (USG) had stated that only 25% of the troops from Sri Lanka presently on peacekeeping operations will be replaced, when they complete their term in Lebanon. These places would be filled through a re-adjustment of existing peacekeepers presently in Lebanon. USG Lacroix confirmed that there will be no further reduction of Sri Lanka Peacekeepers.

Earlier, the Foreign Secretary pointed out that the President of Sri Lanka had appointed Lt. Gen. Shavendra Silva as the Army Commander in the context that there were no factually substantiated or proven allegations of human rights violations against him, and by virtue of his being Chief of Staff at the time.

The Secretary observed that the Government of Sri Lanka disputes the credibility of the compiled reports relating to allegations against Lt. Gen. Silva. He recalled that the 2011 Darusman Report was so seriously flawed that the Human Rights Council at the time had rejected to issue it with a formal number, as a UN document.

Further, it was stated that the OHCHR Inquiry Report (OISL) of September 2015 made clear that “it was a human rights investigation and not a criminal investigation” and that “the names provided in the description of the chain of command do not imply criminal responsibility for those particularly alleged violations listed in this report, either as direct responsibility or under command or superior responsibility. Individual criminal responsibility can only be determined by a Court of Law with all necessary due process guaranteed.” The International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) publication of January 2019 was a re-formulation of previously published flawed material.

He said none of these reports can be taken as substantive as establishing culpability of Lt. Gen. Silva.

The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) as well as the Paranagama Commission reports, which were domestic processes that examined the allegations particularly with regard to the last stages of the conflict, have not found substantive evidence against the conduct of the current Army Commander, who has testified in person before both Commissions.

The Foreign Secretary noted that in relation to this issue Sri Lanka was of the view that there have also been serious discrepancies in the information released to the public domain by the UN. While the MoU with the UNDPO clearly states that modalities for termination shall be agreed to following consultations between the parties, in this instance, the UN did not fulfill its obligation and took a unilateral decision and presented a fait accompli to Sri Lanka.

The decision was conveyed during a courtesy call by the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka on the UN USG, which was inappropriate. It was further regretted that there had been no communication with the Sri Lankan side by the UNDPO prior to the UNSG’s Deputy Spokesman going to the public domain.

It has also been pointed out that the appointment of Lt. Gen. Silva as the Army Commander has no link to the suitability and engagement of the Army personnel being nominated for UN Peacekeeping operations who are thoroughly, jointly vetted, and therefore it is unacceptable to penalize these troops through punitive action on them personally. It would also result in inconveniencing the troop receiving country and possible destabilization and compromising of peacekeeping operations in the relevant theatre of service.

Secretary Aryasinha observed that in operationalizing this decision, by seeking non-replacement of Sri Lankan Peacekeepers in one location where it is relatively easier to serve, while expecting them to continue in more vulnerable and high threat locations, the UNDPO was resorting to “cherry picking” on a questionable basis, which bears hallmarks of politicization of a sacred duty.

On behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka, Foreign Secretary Aryasinha requested that the UNDPO reviews its decision in the context of the facts presented by the Government of Sri Lanka, thereby, being respectful of a country that has been a long standing contributor to UN Peacekeeping since 1960, and continues to serve in some of the most difficult theatres of action, having also suffered casualties.

Comments