How Sri Lanka defeated the LTTE

[davidbfpo]

A BBC report on an issue that appears to have been swept off the agenda:

The United Nations failed in its mandate to protect civilians in the last months of Sri Lanka's bloody civil war, a leaked draft of a highly critical internal UN report says. "Events in Sri Lanka mark a grave failure of the UN," it concludes. The government and Tamil rebels are accused of war crimes in the brutal conflict which ended in May 2009.

Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20308610

Interesting tactic by the Sri Lankan state:

It also points to the Sri Lankan government's "stratagem of intimidation", including "control of visas to sanction staff critical of the state". The result was a UN system dominated by "a culture of trade-offs" - UN staff chose not to speak out against the government in an effort to try to improve humanitarian access.

Certainly not unique.

[Ray]

Any idea of what the so called 'leaked' UN report on the Sri Lankan 'victory' is all about?

I was listening to the BBC World but since I joined at the end I could not get the essence.

Any links to this UN report?

[davidbfpo]

Any idea of what the so called 'leaked' UN report on the Sri Lankan 'victory' is all about?..... Any links to this UN report?

Ray,

My reading is that the official UN report has yet to be published, partly as the Secretary-General has to read it.

[davidbfpo]

From the book review section of 'Perspectives on Terrorism', an e-academic journal:

Ahmed S. Hashim, When Counterinsurgency Wins: Sri Lanka’s Defeat of the Tamil Tigers. (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2013), 280 pages, US $59.95 [Hardcover],
ISBN: 978-0-8122-4452-6.

A highly authoritative and up-to-date study about the protracted civil war in Sri Lanka, which was terminated with the military defeat by government forces of the separatist Tamil Tigers in 2009. The author discusses the evolution of the military measures that ultimately won the intractable insurgency - a conflict which for many years was viewed as unwinnable by the Sinhalese government’s forces - although its military victory came at the cost of human rights violations (and the Tamil insurgents engaged in such violations as well). Also discussed are lessons learned about terrorist tactics by the Tamil Tigers that have been emulated by terrorist groups such as Hizballah, Hamas, as well as al Qaida-affiliated groups in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia. The author also discusses whether the Sri Lankan government’s counterinsurgency tactics are worthy of being implemented by other governments facing their own protracted terrorist insurgencies.

Link:http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/...e/view/285/576

The book on Amazon, with no reviews:http://www.amazon.com/When-Counterin...e+Tamil+Tigers

[ganulv]

A piece from last Friday at Salon.com about the Sri Lankan military’s role in the country’s economy. [LINK]

[davidbfpo]

Elsewhere on SWC and SWJ Blog the Sri Lankan option, the final or most recent stage in the conflict have been discussed. It maybe worth checking in.

First 'Nigeria Military Studies Sri Lankan Tactics for Use Against Boko Haram', with an exchange:http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/nig...nst-boko-haram

Second 'Can the Sri Lanka Army be Described as a Counterinsurgency Force?', a SWJ article:http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art...surgency-force

[Ray]

Much of what is stated is from the military standpoint.

A conflict is not purely military. It has it historical and sociological issues that make it a military issue.

The LTTE case is unique and one has to understand.

The animosity of the Buddhist majority towards the Tamil is historical and they don't honestly recognise that Tamils belong to Sri Lanka. Therefore, there is no love lost if the Tamils exist or they are wiped out.

The animosity is more intense because the Tamils flourished under the British since they learnt English and were in positions of influence that were open to the 'natives'.

On the other hand, the majority Buddhist Sri Lankans looked upon the British as interlopers who came to subjugate them. They boycotted the British and did not learn English and so were left out in the blue whereas the Tamils (who in the first place the Buddhists did not feel belonged to Sri Lanka or Ceylon then) were ruling the roost, after the British.

One of the thing the Sri Lanka Govt did was abolish English and adopted Singhalese Only (the majority Buddhist's language) so that the Tamils did not have the advantage. Then more restrictions were placed. This cause the Tamil heartburn and the LTTE was born.

Therefore, given the equation, wiping out the Tamils ruthlessly and without a care for Human Rights, was not taken to be a crime, and instead applauded.