Font size: 
But last week Sri Lanka again took the international spotlight, unfortunately for the worst of reasons. The country showed it was not only very much at war, but also ready to take on the United Nations. The target of a government offensive was U.N. Undersecretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator John Holmes, who had just completed a short visit to the country and, in an interview with the international media, had referred to Sri Lanka as one of the most dangerous places in the world for humanitarian workers.
This interview raised hackles within some sections of the government. Prime Minister Ratnasiri Wickremanayake pitched into Holmes. Speaking in colloquial Sinhala, he referred to the U.N. official as a devil, and an uncivilized one too. Not to be outdone, the government spokesman, Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, who is believed to be a contender for Wickremanayake's prime ministerial position, denounced Holmes as a terrorist in the pay of the LTTE who needed to be taught a lesson.
Few humanitarian workers in Sri Lanka at the present time would disagree that working in the country presents dangers to them. On Monday morning yet another humanitarian worker, with the Danish Demining Group, was shot dead by unknown gunmen in Jaffna. Apart from a death toll of 20 in the past year, which even government spokespersons do not dispute, humanitarian workers have been questioned by government authorities in various forums and have received various types of threats from known and unknown sources. They have faced these threats in both government-controlled areas of the north and east, as well as in Colombo, apart from the threats and abductions that have been reported from LTTE-controlled areas.
Not satisfied with having put Holmes in his place in the eyes of their constituents and potential voters, some government leaders also attacked the international media for giving prominence to the interview and gloated that the United Nations was not defending its man.
But this observation was only valid for a brief moment of triumph. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon finally stepped in to defend his assistant by noting that the accusations against him were both unwarranted and unacceptable. A spokesman in the secretary-general's office, Farhan Haq, told BBC's Sandeshaya Sinhala Language service that in 2006 Sri Lanka was placed as the second worst country in the world for humanitarian work, mainly on account of 17 humanitarian workers being killed in a single incident in Mutur.
However, it is likely that international interest in this matter will soon diminish, as the world community has other matters outside of Sri Lanka, such as the humanitarian catastrophes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe, to dwell upon. But Sri Lankan interest in this debate must not end because it reveals a state of denial on the part of the government with respect to the deficiencies in its governance.
The denial of what has gone wrong, and dramatic counterattacks upon those who find fault with the government on account of those wrongs, may serve the government well with its voter base. The more brazen denials and counterattacks may make those who defend the government win the admiration of those who support the government come hell or high water. But if problem solving is the goal, then it is necessary to face up to what has gone wrong and correct those mistakes.
Fortunately, the element of balance is still present in Sri Lanka at the highest levels. Foreign Minister Rohitha Bogollagama, when questioned, publicly dissociated the government from the attacks on Holmes, demonstrating sensitivity to international concerns. Likewise, when Tamil temporary residents in Colombo were forcibly evicted, the president publicly dissociated himself from those actions and found fault with the police chief, and the government speedily reversed its decision and apologized to the evicted people.
Only those who acknowledge what is wrong can correct themselves. Further, by attacking the international community instead of correcting itself, the government will lose the goodwill and support that the international community is prepared to richly provide Sri Lanka, as indeed it did at the high point of the peace process during the three years of the ceasefire agreement.
The Sri Lankan government, with President Mahinda Rajapaksa at the helm, continues to have the potential to do what is right -- unlike Zimbabwe, which appears to have gone past the threshold of no return with President Robert Mugabe.
--
(Dr. Jehan Perera is executive director of the National Peace Council of Sri Lanka, an independent advocacy organization. He studied economics at Harvard College and holds a doctorate in law from Harvard Law School. ©Copyright Jehan Perera.)
