Foreign Minister Prof. G. L. Peiris says that the Army of Sri Lanka is not just a “killing machine” and that their presence in the country’s Northern Province is not as an oppressing force to intimidate people, but to assist them.
In an exclusive interview with the Voice of Russia, the Minister of External Affairs talks about the elections in the North Province of the country which are being held after almost 25 years, on the use of Army for Policing and civil duties, and the action against Indian fishermen.
Asked whether the Sri Lankan army would have a policing role in the future, he said: “Not as a primary function, but the army has also been trained to take humanitarian functions as different situations demand.”
He stated that “incrementally” the military would withdraw from civilian work, such as policing in the future.
Following is excerpts of the interview:
Q: You are entering a very important phase as a foreign minister of the country and a senior minister of the government. You are going to have elections in the North province after a 25-year-long gap. How do you see the play out of the September 21st elections?
I think it’s another significant step in the overall process that we have here. Since the end of the war in May of 2009, we have started with addressing the humanitarian issues, IDP and constructing new houses; and then to economic issues such as resurrecting of the economy in the Northern Province, which is growing three times slower than the economy of all the other parts of the island.
And here is the issue of political empowerment after the 25 years. The people of the North will be able to elect members of their provincial council and we are looking forward to that and any other event that is going to enrich the democratic process in our country.
That is a very healthy development that prevails on the island.
Q: But at the same time, if the opposition parties or the Tamil minorities come into power, would you be handing over local control to them so police and other local administrations would obviously be a part of that government? Is that something you would be comfortable with or you would still retain the army in those areas as supervisory over the local government?
Not in any special way. Army presence is everywhere on the island.
Q: Is that normal in your opinion in a democracy?
No-no, not an army in large pressing numbers. But since you asked the questions there are two UN documents, one is by the Office of the High Commissioner for Humanitarian Assistance and another one is the report by the UN Commission for Refugees. Both of them contain a lot of information about the attitudes of people of the North about the military. What they feel about the military.
Q: My question is slightly different: I’m asking you, is it normal to have a fighting force, which is really a defense force against external threats, trained to kill, performing the role of policing? Is that something you want to see in the future or that’s something you would like to change as soon as possible?
It depends on what you mean. In certain parts of the country the army has played a catalytic role in a transition process. It’s not just my opinion, but what people told the UN. They found the military to be useful and the work they have done in regards to construction of houses and roads is a very good step in the transition from conflicts to stability.
Q: Is that the primary role of the army?
It is not, but regarding the circumstances in Sri Lanka we needed to “think outside of the box”. And the army was there not as an oppressing force to intimidate people, but to assist people.
Q: But that’s not what the army is usually trained for. The army is trained to protect, as they say, trained to kill. How would you see it?
The Army of Sri Lanka is not just a killing machine. That’s a misconception.
Q: So would you see the army of Sri Lanka having a policing role in the future?
Not as a primary function, but the army has also been trained to take humanitarian functions as different situations demand. They have played a significant role in disaster management and rescuing people.
Q: So you don’t see the withdrawal of the army from civilian work, such as policing in the future?
Of course, it will happen incrementally.
Q: When do you see that happening?
I think it’s impossible and totally impractical to center deadlines and say by such day it’s going to happen. The general trend of direction is clear, we would like to reduce the military presence there as we move along, but the exigency may vary in different parts of the country. So you should take into account the contextual consideration. Certainly, we want to scale it down, but we would do that in a manner that is appropriate for a particular situation. One of the most important things is that people themselves want the army to play this role of an assistant.
Q: When you say “the people” who do you mean?
I’m talking about the 197 people who were chosen and questioned by the UN observers. I’m talking about the views they have expressed on a matter that we are discussing right now.
Q: But that’s not a referendum that you are planning to conduct.
No, it’s not. We’re talking about the documents by the UN that are circulated among their missions, so it’s something for which the United Nations take responsibility.
