Home
The British Ban
The inclusion of the LTTE in the list of terrorist organisations that are to be banned in Britain, subsequent to the formal approval of the House of Commons, is a victory to all those who have strived to halt the growth of this fast expanding terrorist organisation for almost two decades. It removes the facade of the democratic cover behind which this terrorist organisation has been operating while collecting funds for the LTTE war-chest to unleash terrorism in this country.
Of the 21 terrorist groups named by the British Home Secretary, Jack Straw, the LTTE, by
far, has the most gruesome record of terrorism-a record unmatched in contemporary history,
after the Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot.
LTTE spokesman Anton Balasingham in London, who has been cooing like a dove since it became apparent that the British ban was inevitable, has said that the British decision to include the LTTE in the lists of terrorist organisations will 'impose severe restraints' on the Norwegian initiatiative. The report in Tamil Net that quotes Balasingham does not have him saying how the British ban will result in 'severe restrictions' on the Norwegian initiative.
The basic provisions of the Terrorism Act of Britain make it an offence for anyone to be a member of a terrorist organisation included in the list, support such organisations financially, display its emblems in public or share its pla tform at a meeting of three people or more. The Act also makes money laundering, financing of foreign terrorist groups, incitement in Britain to commit terrorist acts abroad or to provide weapons, training or recruitment, offences.
If Balasingham and his cohorts in Britain are the peace doves they are now pretending to be, how could these provisions hinder the Norwegian peace initiative? What this Act calls for is that Balasingham et al forsake their Tiger identity and act in accordance with the laws of Britain.
Balasingham has also said that that this Bill will make
the 'Sri Lanka government more uncompromising, intransigent and adopt a military path of
state violence, state terrorism and war'. This accusation has been made for long years and
the new British Bill on terrorism is unlikely to have a catalytic effect. The argument of
LTTE terrorism as against 'state terrorism' has been running the course of the argument
whether the egg or the chicken came first. Balasingham the recent apostle of peace, had he
adopted this conciliatory stance of calling for peace negotiations a long time ago,
instead of demanding sovereign democratically elected governments to cow down to his
organisation's demands, the violence and 'war' would have abated and even ended. But for
18 years the LTTE opted for the gun rather than the olive branch.
The British ban on the LTTE will certainly encourage the Sri Lankan government and various
groups arraigned against the LTTE to adopt a much more relaxed and conciliatory attitude
in the negotiations.
More important is that the democratically minded Tamils
who have been terrorised by the LTTE and were unable to express any dissenting opinion can
now come out of their shells. The LTTE has ruthlessly killed any person who dared go
against their fascist Hitlerite decree: One Party, One People, and One Leader. The string
of assassinated TULF leaders, the last being Neelan Tiruchelvam, who was one of the
architects of the Devolution Package, is the best illustration of the rabid fascism of the
LTTE. The British ban which follows a similar ban imposed by the United States and India
with other developed countries like Canada, cracking down on the LTTE will make hardcore
Tamil expatriates, far removed from the miseries of their countrymen in the North and
East, now realise that they have to seek a democratic alternative to the LTTE.
The British ban will come as a moment of truth for the LTTE. For eighteen years they have
been treated with extreme indulgence by western nations because of the sympathy extended
to Tamils by these countries after the 1983 anti-Tamil riots. The west continued to pamper
this terrorist group as being representative of a suppressed or harassed minority while
the LTTE continued to commit ghastly crimes such as gunning down entire populations of
remote Sinhalese hamlets, spraying Buddhist pilgrims worshipping at their sacred places
with AK- 47s, massacring busloads of Buddhist monks, shooting in a mosque full of Muslims
while they were at prayer and bombing of civilian sites in Colombo, such as the Central
Bank, killing hundreds of innocents.
The west awoke a few years ago to find that this outfit
was not a simple group of militants but had grown up to be a massive international
organisation on par with a big multi-national company
Their finances ran into millions of dollars, part of which were collections from doles
paid to Tamil refugees, extorted money from Tamil expatriates, funds made from gun-running
and people and narcotic smuggling. They had a private shipping line for their clandestine
operations and could shift millions of dollars across borders with the help of ex-patriate
Tamil investment bankers for clandestine purposes. The little 'Thambi ' had grown far too
big for his boots. He had assassinated a former Indian Prime Minister, a Sri Lankan
president and attempted to kill the incumbent president. The little 'Thambi' was now a
Frankenstein monster that could be a security threat to the west.
The Daily Telegraph in a report today (published in this edition) makes it clear that the list was 'not driven by (British) foreign policy considerations' While allaying fears that it was aimed at Muslims because 16 of the groups banned were Muslims, Charles Clarke, a Home Office Minister, had said:' We deeply respect the Muslim contribution to this country. We are concerned on the other hand to isolate and attack international terrorist organisations, and that is why we have named the organisations we have'
The LTTE has certainly qualified to be banned under the British Terrorism Act.