Comments on: Public Perceptions: National Security and/or Human Rights http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/ groundviews is an award winning Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiative Sun, 12 Oct 2008 03:08:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Rossana Favero-Karunaratna http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2054 Rossana Favero-Karunaratna Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:57:48 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2054 During times of conflict, the risk of confrontation between the government and the civil society always exists regarding different subjects. The debate areas can be centered in the extensive militarization of the society, human security-or human insecurity, and the access to information. The disparities of the experiences between the citizens are also a fact that can often contribute to the fragmentation of the society. We can still continue to differentiate the imapct of the conflict between areas of Higher and Lower intensity. However, a conflict can also have an effect in ways to exercise power and to keep society under control. This maybe justified on the need to set up security measures but they certainly have to be well designed in order to maintain a balance and avoid to start a "witch hunt" against some of the members or organizations of the civil society due to their political affiliations or ethnic characteristics. On the other side , the civil society and its organs of democratic participation can be affected by what they may perceive as lack of transparency and credibility. Non governmental organizations may be seen caught in a debate regarding their composition, objectives and other aspects, being questioned on their foundations and objectives. This is a situation that has happened all around. The armed conflict in Peru generated distrust and suspicion not only at an individual but a collective level. People, organizations were subjected to threats and extermination on behalf of the Armed Forces, and the terrorist groups: Shining Path and MRTA. However, not all armed conflicts are equal. Differences exist but one still can find similarities which end affecting in equally violent ways the civil population of our countries.Fear, lack of confidence, the impossibility to generate long-term proposals long term and forced migration have become common consequences. The situation where NGOs are under surveillance, the justification of torture as mechanism of defense and as punishment and finally the imposition of politics of mistrust constitute a bad precedent for the years to come. How can the state begin to recognize the role that NGOs can have on this type of conflict situations. A position opened to communication and confidence is what it is expected, specially in cases where transparency is demanded.How can NGOs perceive an openess in the Government officials to debate and start generating areas of mutual cooperation without a political tint. Country must be first. How can we all build a society that can walk hand in hand together towards a common goal?What role can donors play in this kind of situations? After all, it is also important to start thinking in terms of self-generating projects to a certain extent, and avoid dependency in foreign funds.Self-sufficiency must be the goal. The paper Civil Society in Vietnam:Moving from the Margins to the Mainstream, written by Gita Sabharwal and Than Thi Thien Huong, includes some interesting reflections on these issues. In Vietnam there was an extreme situation as no independent organizations were allowed. Nevertheless,in their conclusions they explain that the " embryonic stage of civil society in Vietnam and the continued political concerns and sensitivities around its development makes the task of strengthening this sector a challenge. Engagement in this sector will require the donor community and the government to develop a common shared approach and strategy to support civil society to move from the margins into the mainstream of development practice and debate" Therefore the idea is not to run from challenges but find a shared approach, indeed a situation which will contribute to really strenghten our society and build up a common front in our search for peace.Decision making must involved an open process of consultation with all sectors of the society. NGOs can provide valuable human resources and information that can be shared.In many cases donors prefer to work with civil society organizations in order to avoid corruption and politization of the use of resources. PierreSchori , from the Ministry of International Development Affairs of Sweden, in a paper for the European Platform for Conflict prevention and Transformation" maintains that The key to future development is to change the nature of the relationship with our partners in developing countries. Partnership should be based on a foundation of shared values and mutual trust. Such common values include respect for political and civil rights, democratic ground rules, gender equality, the rights of the child, social and economic rights, and concern for the environment." This has worked across borders. Why can this attitude exist within our own?Can we all be partners? During times of conflict, the risk of confrontation between the government and the civil society always exists regarding different subjects. The debate areas can be centered in the extensive militarization of the society, human security-or human insecurity, and the access to information.
The disparities of the experiences between the citizens are also a fact that can often contribute to the fragmentation of the society. We can still continue to differentiate the imapct of the conflict between areas of Higher and Lower intensity.
However, a conflict can also have an effect in ways to exercise power and to keep society under control. This maybe justified on the need to set up security measures but they certainly have to be well designed in order to maintain a balance and avoid to start a “witch hunt” against some of the members or organizations of the civil society due to their political affiliations or ethnic characteristics. On the other side , the civil society and its organs of democratic participation can be affected by what they may perceive as lack of transparency and credibility. Non governmental organizations may be seen caught in a debate regarding their composition, objectives and other aspects, being questioned on their foundations and objectives.
This is a situation that has happened all around. The armed conflict in Peru generated distrust and suspicion not only at an individual but a collective level. People, organizations were subjected to threats and extermination on behalf of the Armed Forces, and the terrorist groups: Shining Path and MRTA.
However, not all armed conflicts are equal. Differences exist but one still can find similarities which end affecting in equally violent ways the civil population of our countries.Fear, lack of confidence, the impossibility to generate long-term proposals long term and forced migration have become common consequences. The situation where NGOs are under surveillance, the justification of torture as mechanism of defense and as punishment and finally the imposition of politics of mistrust constitute a bad precedent for the years to come.
How can the state begin to recognize the role that NGOs can have on this type of conflict situations. A position opened to communication and confidence is what it is expected, specially in cases where transparency is demanded.How can NGOs perceive an openess in the Government officials to debate and start generating areas of mutual cooperation without a political tint. Country must be first.
How can we all build a society that can walk hand in hand together towards a common goal?What role can donors play in this kind of situations? After all, it is also important to start thinking in terms of self-generating projects to a certain extent, and avoid dependency in foreign funds.Self-sufficiency must be the goal.
The paper Civil Society in Vietnam:Moving from the Margins to the Mainstream, written by Gita Sabharwal and Than Thi Thien Huong, includes some interesting reflections on these issues. In Vietnam there was an extreme situation as no independent organizations were allowed. Nevertheless,in their conclusions they explain that the ” embryonic stage of civil society in Vietnam and the continued political concerns and sensitivities around its development makes the task of strengthening this sector a challenge. Engagement in this sector will require the donor community and the government to develop a common shared approach and strategy to support civil society to move from the margins into the mainstream of development practice and debate”
Therefore the idea is not to run from challenges but find a shared approach, indeed a situation which will contribute to really strenghten our society and build up a common front in our search for peace.Decision making must involved an open process of consultation with all sectors of the society. NGOs can provide valuable human resources and information that can be shared.In many cases donors prefer to work with civil society organizations in order to avoid corruption and politization of the use of resources.
PierreSchori , from the Ministry of International Development Affairs of Sweden, in a paper for the European Platform for Conflict prevention and Transformation” maintains that
The key to future development is to change the nature of the relationship with our partners in developing countries. Partnership should be based on a foundation of shared values and mutual trust. Such common values include respect for political and civil rights, democratic ground rules, gender equality, the rights of the child, social and economic rights, and concern for the environment.”
This has worked across borders. Why can this attitude exist within our own?Can we all be partners?

]]> By: ealamboy http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2053 ealamboy Thu, 06 Mar 2008 06:22:26 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2053 Yep , if NGO’s and foreign governments when they say things nice about SL they are with you’s but when the same people give you’s bit of advice, they are against you. Even though I believe one and only reason that Tamils don’t have Ealam yet is India but Sinhalese always say things to agitate India except when they are in real trouble like when tigers almost took over Jaffna in 2000 SL was on knees to get the help from India. Yep , if NGO’s and foreign governments when they say things nice about SL they are with you’s but when the same people give you’s bit of advice, they are against you. Even though I believe one and only reason that Tamils don’t have Ealam yet is India but Sinhalese always say things to agitate India except when they are in real trouble like when tigers almost took over Jaffna in 2000 SL was on knees to get the help from India.

]]> By: Veedhur http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2052 Veedhur Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:57:52 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2052 (i) There were as many human rights activists then. In fact more local sinhalese human rights activists when compared to today. (ii) The majority singhalese reacted the same way as the majority tamils are doing now - scared and silent (i) There were as many human rights activists then. In fact more local sinhalese human rights activists when compared to today.

(ii) The majority singhalese reacted the same way as the majority tamils are doing now - scared and silent

]]> By: Chinthana Mahinda http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2051 Chinthana Mahinda Wed, 05 Mar 2008 10:46:10 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2051 The tamil pacifists have either, fled to foreign countries, or are six feet under (Courtesy of the GOSL Armed Forces, LTTE, Karuna faction ect.) The tamil pacifists have either, fled to foreign countries, or are six feet under (Courtesy of the GOSL Armed Forces, LTTE, Karuna faction ect.)

]]> By: sham http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2050 sham Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:30:42 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2050 jane has a good point- 'where have all the tamil pacificst gone"!!!!!- jane has a good point- ‘where have all the tamil pacificst gone”!!!!!-

]]> By: Jane http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2049 Jane Sun, 02 Mar 2008 18:37:31 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2049 Let's ponder for a moment on two points on the terror brought on by the Sinhalese speaking armed group in the 1970's who were squashed, banned, and many years later, tamed in to a political party - (i) Where were all the human rights activists then? (ii) How did the majority Singalese react to that situation - were they sympathitic and supportive of the insugents who were of their same ethnicity? Let’s ponder for a moment on two points on the terror brought on by the Sinhalese speaking armed group in the 1970’s who were squashed, banned, and many years later, tamed in to a political party - (i) Where were all the human rights activists then? (ii) How did the majority Singalese react to that situation - were they sympathitic and supportive of the insugents who were of their same ethnicity?

]]> By: Warun Perera http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2048 Warun Perera Sun, 02 Mar 2008 04:25:00 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/2008/03/01/public-perceptions-national-security-andor-human-rights/#comment-2048 Yep You are So right. "Either you are with us or with them". ..... If you are against the GOSL, you are with the r2p, NGOs, Gareth Evans Mob and with the LTTE Terrorists. Yep You are So right. “Either you are with us or with them”. …..
If you are against the GOSL, you are with the r2p, NGOs, Gareth Evans Mob and with the LTTE Terrorists.

]]>