1 December, 2020

Blog

Conspiracy Theories

By Rajiva Wijesinha, MP –

Dr. Rajiva Wijesinha

Over the last week I have had a plethora of conspiracy theories brought to my attention, on a great range of subjects. The first was a newspaper article, by an American of course, alleging that George Soros had a master plan to break up possible rivals to the West into small states that could then be turned into clients or else neutralized. The countries diagnosed as being subjected to this treatment were China and India and Russia and Indonesia, and the method included promotion of internal nationalisms and hence separatism, along with active involvement of NGOs asserting gross violations of human rights.

While as always with conspiracy theories there seemed much exaggeration in the analysis, as also generally with such theories there seems reason to fear some such endeavours. Certainly we in Sri Lanka have every reason to worry about the promotion now in some quarters of the separatist agenda that former LTTE supporters have still not abandoned. At the same time we should understand that, attractive though Sri Lanka is for geo-political reasons, dismembering us is not really of great advantage to anyone. Rather, any fissiparous tendencies here would be of international significance only if they extended to India. It is for that reason that we should be working even more closely with India than we have done in the past. However, typically, the consequence of the I think mistaken Indian vote in Geneva has been increasing hostility to India, with reminders of its role in the eighties, without due appreciation of the sterling support it offered us in the past decade to get rid of terrorism.

This chimes in with the conspiracy theory I have referred to earlier, with efforts on the part of those in the Ministry of External Affairs who believe we must be firmly ensconced in the Western bosom to create animosity towards India. Of course I have long learnt that, as far as the Sri Lankan administration is concerned, one should not diagnose villainy when simple folly is a possible explanation, but still, the repeated upsetting of India before the vote in Geneva, and then the criticism both of the Indian Parliamentary delegation, which almost led to the President refusing to receive them, and of Indian behavior in the sixties – with no reference to the antics of the then President in joining in Cold War hostility to India – seem to me not entirely gratuitous.

All this is sad, because it takes away from what should be our role in international relations, on the lines of that practiced by Mrs Bandaranaike, under whom our foreign policy was at its most successful. The economic mess we got into in that period has detracted from those achievements, but we should not forget how we managed to be a bridge between various rivals in the developing world. With diplomats of the stature of Shirley Amerasinghe and Neville Kanakaratne, non-career ones I should note, trusted by India and China and Pakistan and the Islamic world, we commanded attention far beyond what could be expected for a country as small as ours.

That was a role we could have returned to after our success against terrorism, but unfortunately our Foreign Ministry has instead been getting rid of diplomats who command respect on the world stage. The leadership of the Group of 17, which could have been used judiciously, was instead squandered as we floundered between obsequiousness to the West and aggressive defiance in areas in which we should actually have worked together with them, to promote pluralism as well as a better human rights regime. What we are now doing suggests that this inconsistent approach is recognized as a cock up, but the remedy seems to be worse, since it is based not on principle but on appeasement.

Because we had not developed a programme to take advantage of our success in 2009, we neglected areas which could have increased our influence. We did little for instance to develop ties with ASEAN, and this is the sadder because the President had instructed that this be done, though sadly he had not followed up to ensure for instance that we tried to get Observer status. I do not know whether this can be remedied now, but I suspect no one will try, and the recent successful visit to Thailand will remain just that, with some development in bilateral relations, no strengthening of regional ties.

Thus another opportunity will be missed, and the more significantly, given the importance of that region. This was the subject of yet another conspiracy theory I was introduced to, at a discussion on trade and related policies during the summit meeting between the Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. At what seemed a comparatively anodyne session on bilateralism and multilateralism, I was startled into keen attention by a European analyst who saw the Pacific Partnership patronized by the United States as essentially a move to shut out Europe. He was deeply upset by this, particularly given the importance of Europe in the service sector, a factor he thought the Partnership was designed to affect adversely.

It was also noted by all that the exercise was primarily a move against China, and that efforts to expand the initially limted grouping, to include Japan and Korea and Mexico, could lead to a change in what was generally assumed to be the purpose of free trade agreements. Far from blocs being designed to promote inclusivity, they were to be seen as instruments to leave potentially hostile nations out.

I was reminded then of how Bismarck had achieved German unification on Prussian terms through the use of the Zollverein, the trade agreement between German countries. And that reminded me of something a British friend had told me some time back, when the economic crisis first hit Europe. He claimed that German bankers had planned it all, as a way of ensuring that Southern Europe became politically as well as financially subordinate to the economically more successful North, ie Germany.

This may well have been a characteristic British exaggeration. But watching on television the dramas that accompanied our summit, both the economic vulnerability of Greece and Spain, and the attacks on our President which seemed so cleverly orchestrated, with the Royal Commonwealth Society weighing in at a crucial moment, I realized that events are often more complex than at first sight they seem. The thirst for power is enormous, and the use of economic power to achieve other ends is nothing new. The only saving grace is that different power centres may have to moderate their greed to avoid open confrontation with each other. But we need to understand such factors and strive towards greater freedom for all in the spaces such competition opens up, not allow ourselves to be used simply as tools in the designs of others.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 0
    0

    Aiyo…now Rajiva has become a purveyor of conspiracy theories. People like Dr.Rajiva, Dr.The Yarn, David BlockHead, Dr.Romesh Senewiratne, Padraig Colman etc are nothing more than ‘useful idiots’ of this Rajapaksa family dictatorship.

    The phrase ‘useful idiots’, supposedly Lenin’s, refers to Westerners duped into saying good things about bad regimes.In political jargon it was used to describe Soviet sympathisers in Western countries and the attitude of the Soviet government towards them.

    Useful idiots, in a broader sense, refers to Western journalists, travellers and intellectuals who gave their blessing – often with evangelistic fervour – to tyrannies and tyrants, thereby convincing politicians and public that utopias rather than Belsens thrived.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/documentaries/2010/07/100624_doc_useful_idiots_lenin.shtml

    …also read “Bought priesthood.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bought_priesthood

    …read “Agent of influence.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_of_influence

    …and “Fellow traveler.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellow_traveler

  • 0
    0

    This Rajeeva Wijesinghe type are the Pundits of the new order, who believe they know everything and pander to corrupt Political Leaders for personal benifit and are individuls willing to ridicule any other, who is more knowledgeble, more than their ilk, just to curry favour with the Political Leadership of the Corupt for recognition and position. Not many moons ago he was castigating Ranil Wickremasinghe a cousin of his in the most disparaging manner, just for recognition from the present leadership to secure a National List post to be a Minister in the MR govt. believing to be at the helm in International Affairs. Now he is reluctantly expressing his views reference the Post War Reconcilliation being derailed due to not recognising their effort and being sidelined. Yet he has no guts to call a spade a spade, where MR has made use of them for his ends, lest he get thrown out before one says Jack Robinson. Therefore now he sings hosannas to MR in a half hearted manner not knowing what the future holds for him under MR. This Sychophant breed has inundated the shores of this land.

    Now he is talking of Conspiracies as if it is something new, little knowing that the whole world was subject to Conspiracies all along. We had the cold war period and after the USSR got fragmented due to the very same reason of conspiracy and strategy played by the US. Today this self appointed Policeman, yet continues to run the entire world not by Colonising as done before but by getting the mediocre corrupt in the very countries elected as the Representatives to Govern. Their Economy runs in to Trillions of Dollars in debt due to their investment the world over in harnessing and maintaining the corrupt as the Rulers. The Chinese with almost a two billion population, emerging as the new Economic Force, has invested their monies in this American System, because they know, where there is power there is money to make. Otherwise do you believe the Chinese are fools? No they are not, unlike the fools we have like this Professor Rajeeva Wijesinghe and crowd. It is easy to dispel the intelligent vission of a few, who sees this comedy unfolding as ‘Mere Conspiracies’, thus enjoy power for the moment with the Forces that construe. The fact that Human Rights are violated by the very Custodians responsible in upholding same and further encouraging those responsible here, by avoiding action is a pointer to the ‘Conspiracy Theory’ spoken off.

  • 0
    0

    “The thirst for power is enormous, and the use of economic power to achieve other ends is nothing new” So true of “our President”, poor MR who the vicious west has nothing better to do than attack 24/7, dear Rajiva! Please look yourself in the mirror..

  • 0
    0

    Your success in 2008 is only victory in battle not war. War will be won by Tamils very soon. IN algeria France thorugh when they killed the three leaders, they were succesful. In three years you they lost ALgeria. Your murderous killing of 40,000-100,000 innocent civilians and the torture of People like Isaipriya, Balachndran are the building blocks of Tamil Eelam

  • 0
    0

    Dear Mr. Rajiva Wijesingha,

    You have stated: “That was a role we could have returned to after our success against terrorism.”

    But the LRRC appointed by the President in its report says in
    Para 8.150:

    “The Commission takes the view that the root cause of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka lies in the failure of successive Governments to address the genuine grievances of the Tamil people. The country may not have been confronted with a violent separatist agenda, if the political consensus at the time of independence had been sustained and if policies had been implemented to build up and strengthen the confidence of the minorities around the system which had gained a reasonable measure of acceptance.”

    Under “The Different Phases in the Narrative of Tamil Grievances” it has mentioned in para.8.163 of the Report:

    “The decisive rift in the inter-ethnic relationship came first with the riots of 1958, then in1977, and culminating in what is known as ‘Black July’ of 1983, and the heinous failure of the then Government to provide adequate protection to Tamil citizens. The problems pertaining to the Tamil Community and their grievances cannot be fully addressed without a fuller understanding of this culture of violence that marred the relationship between the Sinhala and Tamil communities.”

    Thus the LLRC accepts that the violent separatist agenda was the outcome of the failure of the successive Governments of Sri Lanka to address the genuine grievances of the Tamil people!

    So Mr. Wijesingha!

    You and the Government of SL reject the Report of the LLRC? So tell the world that the recommendations of the LLRC will not be implemented!!

    The LLRC in its report says that “the ‘Root Cause’of the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka lies in the failure of successive Governments to address the genuine grievances of the Tamil people.”

    At this juncture it is very important to note that the LLRC has not mentioned in its Report what actually caused the successive Governments of Sri Lanka to implement policies and actions that produced genuine grievances to the Tamils and other minorities of the country.
    This is the actual ‘Root Cause.’

    However, the UN Panel Report has identified correctly the ‘Root Cause.’
    Para – 28 of the UN Panel Report says:

    “After independence, political elites tended to prioritize short-term political gains, appealing to communal and ethnic sentiments, over long-term policies, which could have built an inclusive state that adequately represented the multicultural nature of the citizenry. Because of these dynamics and divisions, the formation of a unifying national identity has been greatly hampered. Meanwhile, SINHALA-BUDDHIST NATIONALISM GAINED TRACTION, ASSERTING A PRIVILEGED PLACE FOR THE SINHALESE AS THE PROTECTORS OF SRI LANKA,AS THE SACRED HOME OF BUDDHISM. THESE FACTORS RESULTED IN DEVASTATING AND ENDURING CONSEQUENCES FOR THE NATURE OF THE STATE, GOVERNANCE AND INTER-ETHNIC RELATIONS IN SRI LANKA.”

    The UN Panel Reports thus emphasizes that the ‘ROOT CAUSE’ of the problems of Lanka has been its Sinhala Buddhist nationalism based on SACRED DOCTRINE: Sinhala – Sinhalese – Buddhism – Lanka doctrine with one to one correspondence.

    So Mr. Wijesinghe, do not try to fool all the people!!

    • 0
      0

      Wonderful comment and observation dear Uthayakumar!

  • 0
    0

    You shameless Prof still trying lecture our people.

    So far have you proved this Blue eye Tamil children in the IDPs camps.

    You Prof of lies.

    Where is the prove of these Blue eye children.

    You are a worst racist than Rajapaksa and many others.

    Good luck with your lies.

    Can you dislose your Bank accountrs to anyone.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.