Sri Lanka Entering 'Low-Intensity' War
2 July Associated Press - Sri Lanka Entering 'Low-Intensity' War.
Quote:
... A year ago they called it a "Shadow War." Not anymore...
Four years after a cease-fire raised hopes for peace between the government and Tamil Tiger rebels, Sri Lanka is teetering on the brink.
The brink of what remains the question.
Naval battles, suicide bombings and jungle clashes have once again become the norm on this tropical island that for two decades has been largely known for the ferocious ethnic struggle between its Hindu Tamil minority and its Buddhist Sinhalese majority.
Still, the government and Tigers insist they are abiding by the truce, even as they settle into a pattern of attack and retaliation, with plenty of saber-rattling in between...
The roots of Sri Lanka's conflict stretch back to the years after independence from Britain in 1948, when the government made Sinhala the official language, gave Buddhism a prominent role and Tamils faced widespread discrimination in schools and jobs.
In 1983, a spasm of anti-Tamil violence that killed hundreds sparked war. Each side fought viciously: the Tigers used suicide bombings and murdered rival Tamil militants; the government routinely tortured Tamil civilians. The death toll stood at more than 65,000 when the cease-fire was signed in 2002.
By then, the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam controlled wide swaths of the north and east where they have a country complete with border guards and traffic police...
The inner workings of the Tiger leadership remain a mystery to outsiders, and there's widespread speculation about their motives for attacks such as a June 15 bus bombing that killed 64 civilians, most Sinhalese.
Many say the Tigers are simply trying to push the government to grant broad autonomy over the territories they control. Others warn the rebels could be softening up government forces ahead of the rainy season, which starts in August, when the government's armored vehicles would be bogged down in mud.
The government's motives are clearer - it faces pressure from hard-line political allies, generals and Sinhalese nationalists to destroy the Tigers...
Background links:
Additional - Child Soldiers...
2 July Reuters - Tamil Tigers: Child Fighter Claims High.
Quote:
Claiming they have just trained 6,000 civilians in armed combat, the Tamil Tigers accused the United Nations on Sunday of exaggerating the number of child fighters in the rebels' ranks.
A 2002 cease-fire between the Sinhalese-dominated government and Tamil rebels is rapidly deteriorating, with rising violence killing more than 700 people since April in this island nation off the southern tip of India.
A statement on the rebel group's Web site challenged UNICEF's claim that 1,387 children were among its fighters and said more than 800 of those listed were over 18 years old. Tamil Tigers have admitted to using children to fight their separatist war but have pledged to stop the practice...
Related:
This will be interesting....
Bloomberg has an interesting article this evening on Sri Lanka
Quote:
Sri Lankan Army Captures Mannar Water Control Area From Rebels
By Paul Tighe
Feb. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Sri Lanka's army captured sluice gates controlling water supplies in the Mannar area in the latest advance against bases held by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in the north.
As many as 30 Tamil Tiger fighters were killed or wounded during a daylong battle in Sinnaodaippu, the Defense Ministry said on its Web site late yesterday. The LTTE hasn't commented on the attack.
Air force jets bombed an LTTE artillery command center in Jaffna yesterday and pilots ``confirmed that the target was accurately taken,'' the ministry said.
Sri Lanka's military is staging almost daily attacks on the LTTE's estimated 7,000 fighters in the north, the last region held by the group after it lost control of the east in July. President Mahinda Rajapaksa's government has vowed to eradicate terrorism in the north while seeking a political settlement with all Tamil groups in the region.
The LTTE, designated a terrorist group by the U.S. the European Union and India, has been fighting for a separate homeland for 25 years in a conflict that has killed more the 70,000 people.
Hundreds Killed in Sri Lanka Battle
Hundreds Killed in Sri Lanka Battle, al-Jazeera English, 24 April 2008.
Quote:
Heavy fighting between Tamil separatists and government soldiers has subsided in northern Sri Lanka after intense battles left hundreds dead or wounded.
The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) claimed on Thursday they killed more than 100 soldiers, wounded about 500 and lost only 16 of their fighters in a 10-hour firefight the day before.
But the defence ministry said its forces killed more than 100 Tigers and reported losing 43 soldiers, with another 33 missing in action.
It was the security forces' biggest loss in a single offensive since October 2006.
Sri Lanka rebels offer to lay down arms
http://apnews.myway.com//article/200...D987V6VO0.html
Quote:
May 17, 7:22 AM (ET)
By BHARATHA MALLWARACHI
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka (AP) - The Tamil Tiger rebels admitted defeat in their 25-year-old war with the Sri Lankan government Sunday, offering to lay down their guns as government forces swept across their last strongholds in the northeast.
The government rejected the last-ditch call for a cease-fire, saying the thousands of civilians trapped in the war zone all have escaped to safety and there was no longer any reason to stop the battle. The military said the remaining guerrillas were still fighting.
Where was it, where does it go next
In many ways I think this will be a classic case study on how wage a civil war / counterinsurgency. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have waged a very interesting conflict against the government of Sri Lanka. I don't recall reading about any other conflict that is remotely similiar in scope.
The LTTE were among the first to develop cadres of suicide bombers (Black Tigers), normally individuals with suicide belts/vests, but they have also vehicle bombs (it was a truck bomb that seriously damaged the financial center in Colombo), and suicide boats that were capable of outrunning most Sri Lankan naval craft.
In large pitched battles they frequently defeated conventional Sri Lankan troops, and in some battles the LTTE managed to kill several hundred Sri Lanka soldiers in one to two day battles using indirect fires and maneuver.
In the last few years the LTTE even developed their own air force of sorts, and actually conducted raids on the airport in Sri Lanka's capital creating a great deal of panic for the economy.
The Sri Lankan Tamils have large expat communities that are political active and raise considerable funds. They conducted fairly large protests recently in the UK and Canada in an effort to mobilize the international audience to put pressure on the Sri Lankan government to stop commiting alleged atrocities in the current fight, a fight that may spell the end of the LTTE as a credible force.
Over the years this conflict has ebbed and flowed from mostly insurgent activities to realitivel large scale conventional fights, and LTTE operations have not been restricted to Sri Lanka. The government's current offensive is much different than the many they launched in previous years. Many of their previous offensives were successful until they the government couldn't sustain it, so they were unable to defeat hardcore pockets of resistance, thus they withdrew once again handing the territory they fought so hard for back to the LTTE. Obviously something has changed this time (external support?), and it appears that the Tigers will finally be defeated as a credible force. I'm sure we all hope that the LTTE is finally facing defeat, so Sri Lanka can hopefully enjoy a hard earned peace.
Questions:
1. Even if the LTTE main cadre and leadership is killed or captured, will that be the end of the Tamil struggle in Sri Lanka? Certainly not if Sri Lanka is not prepared to conduct a robust effort to address the needs of their Tamil people.
2. What role will the Tamil expats play? Will they assist their people in accepting a peaceful resolution with the government, or will they attempt to subvert any peace efforts from afar?
3. Is the Sri Lankan military and government capable of winning and sustaining the peace?
The next few months will be critical.
How Sri Lanka defeated the LTTE
The term defeat is relative, thus it is used here only to refer to the battlefield defeat that the LTTE clearly were handed. It will take several months before we know if the defeat is complete. The LTTE diaspora is alive and well and they have already vowed to continued the fight. There are also LTTE splinter groups that were not under Prabakaran's sway that can now emerge as dominate players over time if the Sri Lankan government does not rapidly and satisfactorly address the thousands of Tamils displaced by the fighting.
Recent articles written by those who appear to have good access indicate that several factors contributed to the defeat to the LTTE, but the following seemed to be essential:
1. Strong Sri Lankan political resolve
2. External support primarily from China, both military and political
3. Joint operations
a. Naval operations to isolate the LTTE by sinking their supply ships
b. Air operations to conduct deep attack opertions (and close air support)
c. Special opertions forces conducting raids deep in LTTE territory
d. Most important militarily large scale, multi-front ground offensive where Sri Lankan Soldiers took and held ground.
4. Important split within the LTTE ranks in 2004 that the LTTE never recovered from.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8063409.stm
Quote:
Today, Sri Lanka is among the few nations that can say it has successfully quelled a nearly three-decade insurgency by military means.
This quote along is worthy of discussion.
Quote:
So many factors have contributed to the success of the Sri Lankan forces. There was a clear aim and mandate from the political level to the official level and to the military level to destroy the LTTE at any cost.
Political will and mandate
They also had international political support from China. China helped keep the UN off Sri Lanka's back, while Sri Lanka conducted aggressive military operations. These operations were viewed by many in the West as inhumane (what war isn't?) and perhaps outside the bounds of what is considered legal by the international community. It can be argued that ending the war is more humane in the long run than tying one's hands behind their back and dragging the conflict out for years. Perhaps this is a wake up call as to the true nature of war, and why so many western countries recently congratulated Sri Lanka on their success?
Quote:
A massive recruitment drive for the armed forces was launched (it increased from about 80,000 to more than 160,000 personnel). New weapons - including fighter jets, artillery guns and multi-barrel rocket launchers - were bought from countries like China, Pakistan and Russia, and new military strategies and tactics were evolved.
Sustained military build up
Quote:
Small teams of commandoes were sent behind enemy lines to carry out attacks against rebel leaders and key defence lines.
Disruption, destroy their sense of confidence
Quote:
The military also started to stretch them thin by opening up a number of fronts in the north.
Perfect application of conventional forces to take and hold the ground.
Quote:
The Tamil Tigers had no answer to the bombing missions by air force jets.
Asymmetric mismatches are always desired.
Quote:
The Sri Lankan military juggernaut cruised ahead despite mounting civilian casualties. The rebels thought the international community, especially neighbouring India, would intervene looking at the civilian suffering and bring about a ceasefire in the final stages. When that did not happen, they ran out of options
The LTTE was isolated politically and then defeated militarly.
the following is an interesting article on China's support (note the turn around in the fight started after 2004 long after most western countries withdrew their support from Sri Lanka, so China, Pakistan and Russian apparently made the biggest contributions in foreign aid and training).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6297463.ece
Chinese support crucial to Sri Lankan victory over Tamils
Quote:
Sri Lanka’s imminent victory over the Tamil Tigers owes much to a badly needed injection of arms and aid from China, as well as robust Chinese support at the United Nations, ever since the Government began its new offensive in 2007.
Quote:
Beijing appears, however, to have increased arms sales significantly to Sri Lanka since 2007, when the US suspended military aid over human rights issues.
China's contributions were not altruistic, they want access to Sri Lankan ports so they can protect their trade lanes. They upped their aid to Sri Lanka from a few millions dollars to one billion dollars last year which must have enabled Sri Lanka to sustain their offensive against the LTTE.
Quote:
In addition, China has provided crucial diplomatic support in the UN Security Council, blocking efforts to put Sri Lanka on the agenda.
I reckon Bob has nailed a sensible COA...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bob's World
Bill:
This is a good laydown.
My assessment would be that the LTTE made a major strategic error in transitioning to phase III operations too soon and attempting to fight this as more of a civil war than as an insurgency. Essentially setting up the "weak state vs strong state" scenario which rarely ends well for the weaker.
Concur that the "Insurgency" is by no means defeated, but that the security forces have done their job in creating a window of opportunity for the politicos to fully address the roots of the insurgency itself. My fear is that while those who missunderstand the true nature of insurgency cheer the "victory," the very victory they are cheering will be slipping away as new leadership emerges, wiser from the recent setback, and begins anew with phase 1 activities.
Right now what the US should be doing is a full court diplomatic press on the government of Sri Lanka to close the deal. To be the bigger man. To be a Lincoln /Grant and recognize that one must be a gracious in victory as they are determined in battle.
State Department your move. Judging by your actions in our own GWOT to date, I fear you don't fully realize that though...
And I bet that it doesn't happen. Hubris is a powerful politico/military force (as the Coalition in OIF in late '03 demonstrates...)
Cheers
Mark
Sri Lankan COIN strategy---"a difficult model to adopt"
A good short article in the paper Sunday covered the fact that in the LTTE COIN, "[They] were not worried about collateral damage…So in many regards it's a very difficult model to adopt." Some great ethical and strategic debate should come from the last push of this conflict, which is being deemed as successful despite the heavy civilian casualties in the end surge. (Below is the print article with some snippets from the original author’s submission not published in the print version).
“Other lessons are either unique to Sri Lanka or would be politically unpalatable in other societies, including the high civilian and military death tolls and alleged human rights violations. The United Nations and many human rights groups repeatedly called for a cease-fire so civilians caught in the crossfire could flee the conflict area -- calls the government largely dismissed. Because Rajapaksa's base was the nation's Sinhalese majority, there was relatively little domestic pushback over the deaths and displacement of ethnic Tamil civilians. The government restricted the access of international media and independent humanitarian groups, making it difficult to report what was going on. The lesson of nonstop, no-holds-barred combat -- the army even powered on during monsoons -- was complemented by better use of small, flexible "deep penetration" special forces units, many trained by their U.S. and Indian counterparts. Dressed like the rebels, they went behind enemy lines, assassinating Tigers, crippling infrastructure in rebel-held areas and reporting target locations to the army and air force. Cutting supply lines, creating faster and more mobile special forces units, going after financing and hitting jungle hide-outs are additional strategies applicable to other insurgency battles, experts said. At the same time, the Tigers' scope made them a bigger target. For years, they parked freighters at sea and ferried arms, oil, food and other supplies into ports they controlled. In recent years, the government destroyed seven of these mother ships, reportedly with the help of satellite intelligence from India and the United States, and made better use of small, maneuverable, heavily armed "Arrow" vessels.”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...,7880875.story
chicagotribune.com
Sri Lanka's defeat of the Tamil Tigers offers lessons for other countries fighting insurgencies
By Mark Magnier
Tribune Newspapers
May 24, 2009
NEW DELHI -- Sri Lanka's victory last week after a 25-year battle against the Tamil Tiger rebels represents a rare government success story in the global fight against insurgencies.
Even as leaders in Colombo declared a national holiday, military planners and analysts around the world have begun scrutinizing the war for lessons on how to fight Al Qaeda, the Taliban and other lethal militant groups.
For more than two decades, the conflict in Sri Lanka had neither side strong enough to overcome the other.
That changed three years ago, when the Sri Lankan army adopted more mobile tactics, overhauled its intelligence system, promoted young commanders and steadily hemmed in one of the world's most ruthless and innovative rebel movements. At its peak, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, as the Tigers are formally known, controlled one-third of the country; had its own army, a navy and nascent air force; and served as a role model for insurgencies worldwide with its pioneering use of suicide vests and female suicide bombers.
Last week, the army displayed in triumph what it said was the portly, bullet-riddled body of Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran.
Arguably the most important factor in ending the stalemate was the political will to do whatever it took. In a supreme irony, President Mahinda Rajapakse was elected in November 2005 by a 1.9 percent margin after Prabhakaran urged Tamils to boycott the election. Rajapakse made military victory over the Tamils a cornerstone of his administration and signaled to the military it could get whatever resources it wanted simply by asking.
"They did everything a general dreams of," said retired Indian Maj. Gen. Ashok Mehta, a commander of the Indian peacekeeping forces in Sri Lanka in the late 1980s. "Unfettered resources and no political interference."
The military budget quickly grew by 40 percent a year and the army by 70 percent to 180,000 troops as it added 3,000 a month, compared with 3,000 a year previously -- drawn largely from poor rural Sinhalese attracted by relatively high wages.
With more soldiers, the army was able to hit the Tigers on several fronts simultaneously, breaking with years of hit-or-miss operations.
"Before the army would take territory then move on, allowing the LTTE to come back," said military spokesman Brig. Udaya Nanayakkara. "That changed, and we hit them on all four fronts so they could no longer muster all their resources into one place."
Some lessons are transferable, experts said. "Sri Lanka provides a case study," said Rohan Gunaratna, head of the International Center for Political Violence and Terrorism Research in Singapore.
Other lessons are either unique to Sri Lanka or would be politically unpalatable in other societies, including the high civilian and military death tolls and alleged human-rights violations. The UN and many human-rights groups, for example, repeatedly urged a cease-fire so civilians caught in the crossfire could flee the conflict area, calls the government largely dismissed.
"They were not worried about collateral damage," said Ajey Lele, a military analyst and ex-Indian wing commander. "So in many regards it's a very difficult model to adopt."
the character of the war changes
I"m posting a couple of links to LTTE and supporter websites to demonstrate how sophisticated their media operation is.
http://www.eelamweb.com/
http://www.tamilnet.com/
Also a link to an article on how the LTTE's defeat will impact the drug trade in S. Asia. I can see where the loss of the LTTE merchant ships would have a significant impact, but the drug trade is an open source business, so it will be interesting to see who fills this void.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/C...ow/4595554.cms
Quote:
Thus, over the years, drug enforcement agencies in Mumbai have arrested several Sri Lankan Tamils, and charged them with smuggling narcotics. "The accused were found to be highly motivated. They were taking the risk not just for the money, but because they believed in the LTTE's cause,'' said a public prosecutor. "The LTTE started using the revenue from narcotics to finance its armed struggle ever since the conflict started in 1983,'' said intelligence expert B Raman. However, the LTTE's role in the narcotics business was different from other international gangs such as the `D' Company, which indulges in direct selling of drugs.
Prof G H Peiris, a Sri Lankan security expert who writes for the US magazine ‘Jane's Defence Weekly', believes that the LTTE's involvement in the international drug trade was largely in the form of bulk delivery of heroin and cannabis from producing areas in Asia to consuming countries. He said that there did not appear to be any extensive involvement of the LTTE in drug ‘peddling' in the retail market or participation in opium growing and refining of heroin.
Posted by tequila,
Quote:
Unfortunately I think the U.S. has little leverage over Sri Lanka at the moment, which is probably much more interested in embracing the PRC, especially given the Rajapaksa brothers' personal interest such relations. The Sri Lankan media is naturally full of denunciations of the West in general for seeking to investigate human rights violations and hinder military action, which in their view did nothing but protect the Tigers.
Yep, and if you look at the LTTE websites they have links to all the articles where prominent politicians and human rights groups are calling war crime investigations. Of course you have to wonder to what end? In my opinion the character of the war has changed from a shooting war to lawfare.
Posted by Bob's World,
Quote:
My assessment would be that the LTTE made a major strategic error in transitioning to phase III operations too soon and attempting to fight this as more of a civil war than as an insurgency. Essentially setting up the "weak state vs strong state" scenario which rarely ends well for the weaker.
I don't think they transitioned too soon, as this strategy worked very well for them. Remember this war has been ongoing for over 30 years, and over that time the LTTE built up a powerful para-military and military force, so they could take and hold terrain. Since Sri Lanka is an island nation, they couldn't establish needed safehavens across the border, and they needed their safehavens to facilitate recruiting, training, planning, business, practice governance, etc. It is important to note that while they didn't have a safehaven for their military, the LTTE did establish a very large and politically active global diaspora. This is now the fighting wing for the current lawfare taking place IMO.
The LTTE's biggest mistake was their failure to recognize the transformation that took place in the Sri Lanka government and military. The military was better trained, larger, better equipped, and most importantly had a political mandate to destory the LTTE. The LTTE probably should have given up land and dispersed and started over with low level insurgency and terrorist acts, but obviously that is a hard pill for anyone to swallow. Seems like that decision hits all three factors: interests (safehaven, psychological victory, etc.), pride (fight until the last man), and fear (what happens if we give up our hard earned territory?). The LTTE strategy seemed to be, survive long enough to get the the international community to intervene in their behalf, but obviously that didn't happen. Like many defeated armies they were stuck in yesterday's strategy.
Civil war versus insurgency is somewhat loaded, but in general (begining with our civil war) one side isn't interested in overhrowing the established government, but rather succeeding from the establishment. The LTTE didn't want to overthrow the government in Colombo, they wanted to establish their own homeland. It would have been a different fight altogether if they wanted to overthrow the government and establish controll over the entire nation. One that they couldn't have won.
Looking for info on Sri Lanka's defeat of the LTTE
I have to write a relatively short paper for a class on terrorism and terrorist groups (a problematic definition, I know). I have wide latitude on the subject and thought I would look at Sri Lanka's defeat of the LTTE and the employment of the "ruthless" approach. I mainly want to focus on the shift in strategy over the last decade, how they handled the international objections (human rights), and prospects for long term stability.
Bottom line, am looking for good books and articles as sources, or credible websites. This isn't a dissertation, but the sources need some rigor.
common sense doesn't apply
Wilf,
Excellent points and they to many conflicts around the globe. I wish some of our DOD and DOS policy members would comment on how any nation could feasibly defeat a separatist movement like the LTTE following our policies? Policies as you stated that we wouldn't follow ourselves. From where I sit we seem to generate extremely naive policies that are beginning to result in America influence being less welcome in many parts of the world. One only need to review the Leahy Amendment on human rights violations to get an understanding of how far we have gone down this road to unintended isolation from the real world.
The losers now (and their supporters, both State and non-State in the global community) get to take the winners to trial, which means that the conflict will continue via lawfare that Jmm99 wrote about a few times. In a way the EU, UN, U.S. and others have joined hands with the LTTE, while China and others have joined hands with the Sri Lankan government. Is this a World War (using lawfare)?
I think the West in general is getting to the point that our extremely simplistic views of right and wrong are going to result in us in having less influence on the world stage as we continue to isolate ourselves in a concoon of quixotic ideals that simply don't apply in the real world. Perhaps the saddest part of this is the intent to support human rights is good, but in practice the way we apply the policies results in indecisive action, which in turns results in conflicts dragging on for years. This results not only in much more suffering, but in lost generations that know nothing but war.
If it is essential to our national interests to enter a conflict (directly or indirectly), then whenever possible I would recommend pushing for a strategy that resulted in a decisive victory instead of prolonging the status quo by applying naive policies. I realize the world isn't black and white, but in many cases we "seem" to add imaginary complexity.