We would like you to revisit January 1994 in your memory lane: A
Year that led to the dissolution of three multinational federations namely
Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia also gave birth to nineteen new
states. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech
Republic, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan , Macedonia, Moldova , Russia,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Tajikistan , Turkmenistan , Ukraine ,Uzbekistan and
Yugoslavia [ Serbia and Montenegro ]. Three states namely Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania regained their independence. Chechnya in Russia and Kosovo in Serbia
were engaged in struggle for independence.
European
nations granted conditional recognition to these states. Therefore a precedent
exists. When Tamil Eelam was struggling for independence Tamil
Diaspora living in almost all of the European nations was in streets
urging these nations to step in to redeem Tamils of Eelam from a genocidal war.
Necessary alarm bells have been sounded and European nations which had
established norms to recognize new nation states, could have applied their
collective mind and proven their political will by extending the precedent to
Tamil Eelam. But alas! That historical opportunity was lost by the saviors of
civilized democracy whereas freedom aspiring people of Tamil Eelam failed to
win recognition for their homeland nation.
In December 1991 EC Council of Ministers chose to recognize Yugoslav
and [Soviet] Republics seeking independence. It was a conditional recognition.
What are those conditions? Let me quote in verbatim:
“The European Community and its member states confirm their
attachment to the principles of Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris, in
particular the principle of self determination. They affirm their readiness to
recognize, subject to the normal standards of international law, those states
which following the historic changes in the region, have constituted themselves
on a democratic basis, have accepted the international obligations and have
committed themselves in good faith to a peaceful process and to negotiations.
Therefore, they adopt a common position on the process of recognition of these
new states, which requires:
► respect for the provisions of the Charter of United Nations and
the commitment subscribed to the Final act of Helsinki and in the Charter of
Paris, especially with regard to rule of law, democracy and human rights.
► guarantees for the rights of ethnic and national groups and
minorities in accordance with the commitments subscribed in the framework of
CSCE
► respect the inviolability of all frontiers which can only be
changed by peaceful means and by common agreements
► acceptance of all relevant commitments with regard to disarmament
and nuclear non-proliferation as well as to security and regional stability.
► commitment to settle by agreement, including where appropriate
recourse to arbitration, all questions concerning state succession and regional
disputes.
Let me remind you humbly the above quoted, Declaration on Guidelines
on the Recognition of new states in Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union and
the Declaration on Yugoslavia: Extraordinary EPC Ministerial meeting [Brussels}
/ EPC Press Releases P 128 & 129 of 1991 dated 16th December 1991. Further
the Congress of Berlin 1878 had spelt safeguards for minorities in the post
First World War Settlements. These
documents would have given the parameters to grant recognition for Tamil Eelam
and Tamils in forefront of freedom struggle would have declared independence
and sought recognition as laid in these precedents, but they lacked the initiative.
Let me also remind the precedent laid by British Prime Minister
Winston Churchill during the Second World War when he endorsed the setting up
of Free French Government in Exile headed by Charles De Gaulle in British soil.
Now that Tamil Eelam is under occupation by forces of aggression
recognition of Tamil Eelam Government after establishing it within Srilanka
would not be possible today, though it could be justified. As immediate step
Britain which once granted independence to Srilanka without resolving the
ethnic question, due to historical compulsions of the post-Second World War
conditions, could allow the setting up of Tamil Eelam Government in Exile. Such
Government must pledge to the parameters laid down as mentioned in earlier
paragraphs and collective recognition of that Tamil Eelam Government in Exile
must emanate from Member Nations of European Community. Britain must take the
lead to mobilize support for such initiative.
Perhaps India factor and Europe’s nobility to uphold Indian
geo-political interests would have made European community speechless at the
height of civil war in Srilanka. But now in the aftermath of the so-called
ghost of terrorism laid to rest, when in country after country Tamils of Eelam
through democratic process by way of referendums are expressing in favour of
Independent Tamil Eelam, it is high time for European Union to recall the
precedent laid and conditions spelt for recognition of states in last decade of
last century in Europe. India too houses the Tibetan Government in Exile and it
would not be an untouchable proposal if a democratic Government of Tamil Eelam
attains independence.
To enlighten European Union and to awaken the Indian
Union it would be our duty as responsible political party in India to recall
the events that led to the birth of Bangladesh before placing you our pleas for
Tamil Eelam. International law had not prohibited the creation of new states by
way of secession, the Singapore [1965], Bangladesh [1971] and Eritrea [1993]
precedents reveal. But here we wish to lay emphasis on Bangladesh secession
since India was supportive of that secession.
Let me quote from the International Commission of Jurists, “The
events in East Pakistan 1971’ [Geneva ICJ, 1972 page 69] “If one of the
constituent peoples of a State is denied equal rights and is discriminated
against, it is submitted that their full right of self determination will
revive” It must be noted that self determination here meant the right to
independence. India’s use of force in violation of jus cogens was mitigated
by humanitarian concerns caused by the Pakistan’s campaign of violence against
Bangladeshi people.
We want to stress
that India forgot its own precedent, forgot its own defense as reported in the
Security Council debate [UN Doc S/PV 1606 dated 4 th December 1972] with regard
to its justification for intervention in Bangladesh. Much grave crimes against
humanity had been unleashed in a genocidal war against Tamils of Eelam. Yet
India failed to follow its own Bangladesh precedent, may be due to hatred for
the group that led the freedom struggle. Now that the much despised group had
been eliminated, still Tamils of Eelam are not getting any justice under the
Neo-Nazi Leadership of Srilanka President Mahinda Rajapakshe; time for
introspection by India had arrived.
No comments:
Post a Comment