Monday 6 August 2018

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

06 August 2018

Buck Stopping State or Show me State?

[War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity need to be exposed and war criminals need to be brought to justice via the UNHRC. As much as the crimes Hitler committed against the Jewish people are condemned as War Crimes and the Nazis who perpetrated these crimes were prosecuted, so the US and its military, who nuclear bombed helpless Japanese civilians need also be exposed. 
A failure to do this only promotes the belief that the rich and the powerful can get away with any type of dastardly deed.
There is a saying in Tamil – that the Guru is never wrong. The English parallel of that to my mind is ‘The Buck stops with me’.
["The buck stops here" is a phrase that was popularized by U.S. President Harry S. Truman, who kept a sign with that phrase on his desk in the Oval Office. The phrase refers to the notion that the President has to make the decisions and accept the ultimate responsibility for those decisions. Truman received the sign as a gift from a prison warden who was also an avid poker player. It is also the motto of the U.S. Naval Aircraft Carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75).
President Jimmy Carter arranged to borrow the sign from the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum. Footage from Carter's "Address to the Nation on Energy" shows the sign on the desk during his administration.
The reverse of the sign reads, "I'm from Missouri." This is a reference to Truman's home state, as well as Willard Duncan Vandiver's statement, "I'm from Missouri. You've got to show me".] - Wikipedia
If America was the leader in that war and there was no nation above America – then one is not allowed to expressly question the processes. To do so would empower the opposition – Japan in the above instance.
Was the Sri Lankan war of identical structure as World War II ? Obviously, the Rajapaksa Government took the position that it was NOT accountable to anyone. In terms of Sovereign status, there are limits on the direct involvement of other nations. LTTE also took the parallel position as the Rajapaksa Government – that it was not accountable to anyone. The question therefore is whether they – the LTTE truly believed that they had sovereign power of belief.  In the case of the Rajapaksa Government – as per the structure - the Defence Secretary who controlled the Armed Forces, was accountable to the Government? One driven by belief alone is not accountable to an appointed officer. But an appointed officer is responsible to the one appointing her/him. Mr Gotabaya Rajapaksa did not have the immunity of belief during the period he held the official position.  
Belief based actions in parliament are covered by parliamentary-privilege. Likewise, actions in defence of one’s Sovereignty, in the court of Natural Justice / Dharma.
In war where both sides are outside immediate supervision - one is taken to protect one’s right to live including by killing the opponent who would otherwise kill us. That is also to protect one’s natural sovereignty. In Love – all is fair – because Love is absolute and not relative. To my mind the saying ‘All is fair in Love and War’ is about Sovereignty. But such privilege is confirmed only where one has acted within the area of Sovereignty. Rape and torture of the opponent and killing of  civilians– are NOT covered by such impunity. The opposite side needs to be Equal for one to be entitled to such protection by belief. In war, where one fails to think of the opposing  person as an Equal – one is not within one’s belief and therefore is not protected by the laws of Nature / Truth. In love there are no sides and hence the immunity. The buck stops with the leader who acts purely out of belief.
The above mentioned editorial states:
[On September 24, 2015 the US-led United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) resolution on Sri Lanka was tabled. The resolution called for wide-ranging reforms and a domestic accountability mechanism with international involvement.  
The resolution in fact calls for the institution of a hybrid court or hybrid mechanism to try persons alleged to have committed war crimes during the civil war which commenced in July ‘83 and ended in May 2009. 
The UN has claimed that during the final stages of the war around 20,000 Tamil civilians were killed by the Sri Lankan military.  
The killing of civilians is considered a war crime under terms of Article 25 of the Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907 Hague IV Convention) states that, “The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or building which are undefended is prohibited”. 
Killers of civilians need to be brought to book first as an example that the countries of this world and particularly the people of Sri Lanka will not tolerate premeditated killing of its people. Secondly it sends a message to perpetrators of these crimes, that immunity will not be granted under cover of war. 

As per American example the opposite of  Buck stops with me – is  “I'm from Missouri. You've got to show me"
Missouri is known as the ‘Show Me State’. This confirms lack of trust and hence the need to see to believe. The Sri Lankan parallel of Missouri state seems to be Northern  Province.
Its current parallel is Transparency. Those who showed – lose the protection of belief. The most recent manifestation of this is Mrs Vijayakala Maheswaran who ‘showed’ and hence was entitled to be opposed. Likewise Mr Rajapaksa ‘showed’ victory in war  over fellow citizens and ceased to be part of Unitary State – led by people who make the buck stop with them.

What happens when we punish those who have the right to impunity? The science of karma takes over and the punisher begins another war.

No comments:

Post a Comment