Subramanian Swamy @Swamy39@dkgdelhi : RaM Setu leads to Lanka. Rajapakshe supports scrapping of SSCP. And under UN Law of the Sea 1968 he has a right
March 1, 2013
Rejection of Pachauri Committeee report by GOI is a serious issue which has ramifications under international law. Any Setu channel cutting midway through the Rama Setu, even if close to India's territorial waters has an impact on the Sri Lankan coastline and fishing activities.
INDIA is bound under international law to take Sri Lankan Government into confidence before undertaking any project in these waters.
A precedent exists in Panama Canal: President Jimmy Carter Signed the Panama Canal Treaty September 7, 1977
How many times have you taken a shortcut through a neighbor's backyard? The U.S. created a 51-mile shortcut between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through a distant neighbor's "backyard" and called it the Panama Canal. Of course, the U.S. got permission from Panama first, back in 1904. On September 7, 1977, President Jimmy Carter signed the Panama Canal Treaty and Neutrality Treaty promising to give control of the canal to the Panamanians by the year 2000.
In particular, the choice of an alignment cutting through Rama Setu will result in the destruction of a monument which stood as a TSUNAMI wall during the last Dec. 26, 2004 Tsunami. Tampering with the structure may have serious impact on Indian and Sri Lankan coastlines in case another Tsunami strikes (which is very, very likely given the movements in plate tectonics along the India-Burma-Sunda plates).
Sri Lankan govt. can take the case to Intl. Court of Justice under international law.
There is the additional factor of Kachativu agreement signed by Indira Gandhi which clearly recognized the rights of Sri Lanka under international law and based on these a strong case exists for Sri Lanka to claim that any channel cutting through the shared INTERNATIONAL WATERS (though technically within the Indian side of the territorial waters) which have a serious effect due to the future devastations which will be caused to Sri Lanka coastline in case another tsunami strikes and the so-called Setu Channel is operational which will draw the energy of the tsunami close to the Indian and Sri Lankan coastal boundaries.
The tampering with Rama Setu to create a navigation channel cannot be a unilateral decision by Govt. of India.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kachchatheevu The channel runs too close to Kachativu for Sri Lanka's comfort. The agreements themselves are subject do political disputes. The proposed Setu Channel will impair the fishing activities by both Indian and Sri Lanka fishermen, thus rendering the Kachativu agreements virtually DEFUNCT, null and void.
If Sri Lankan Govt. issues a formal diplomatic complaint, Hon'ble SC will HAVE TO take note of it. IN any case, the case pending in SC already underscores the fact that Sri Lankan govt. agreement should have been taken and that Sri Lankan has raised serious ecological objections to the proposed sethusamudram project itself. GOI will land up in an international maritime dispute.
Kachativu island now belongs to Sri Lanka
New Delhi | Tuesday, Aug 31 2010 IST
Kachativu Island now belongs to Sri Lanka and ''we frequently advise our fishermen that they should not enter the Sri Lankan waters,'' External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said today.
Replying to a calling attention on this issue in the Lok Sabha, Mr Krishna, however, said efforts are on between the Indian fishermen's organisations and their Sri Lankan counterparts to resolve their disputes regarding some of the facilities ''our fishermen require.'' He also said that currently Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao is in Sri Lanka and she is also expected to raise this issue with the Rajapakse Government. Unhappy with the Minister's reply, members from Tamil Nadu expressed their anger and strong displeasure.
Earlier, members across party lines from the state urged the Government for scrapping of the'' illegal 1974 Kachativu Island agreement with Sri Lanka and reclaim its sovernigty over this strategically located island situated in the Palk Bay.'' Raising the matter, UPA partner and senior DMK leader T R Baalu said this agreement was signed in June 1974 and was brought before Parliament in July 1974 in the form of discussion, while as per the constitution any part of the Indian land could be handed over only after amending constitution and passing a resolution to that effect.
He said,'' since the agreement is illegal so it should be scrapped.
The agreement in no way is in the interest of our Nation and so the Government should take initiative for its restoration.'' He said it had snatched away the bread earning rights from the Tamil fishermen as they were no longer been allowed to catch fish in that region which is known as one of the best "Prawn" region in this part of the world.
Supporting Mr Baalu's arguments, Dr M Thambidurai (AIADMK) said Kachativu Island was an integral part of Tamil Nadu and while signing the agreement, the State Government was not taken into confidence. He urged the Government to scrap this agreement altogether. He further said as per reports available indicates that Chinese Navy is keen on having its presence in the Indian ocean and'' if they could set up some facility that would be a great threat to our national security so the Government should restore the pre-1974 status of this tiny Island.'' P R Natarajan (CPIM) and A Ganeshmurthy (MDMK) both associated themselves with the arguments of Mr Baalu and Mr Thambidurai and were of the view that India should scrap the 1974 treaty.
-- (UNI)
http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/India/20100831/1577318.html
India spared no effort to assist and cooperate with Sri Lanka to eliminate the LTTE
8 July 2011, 9:57 pm
by G. Parathasarathy
When the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, Ms J Jayalalithaa, paid her first visit to New Delhi after assuming office, she forcefully articulated her concerns on Sri Lanka. Two issues concerning Sri Lankan Tamils evoke passions in Tamil Nadu.
The first is the firm belief that after the LTTE was eliminated in 2009, Sri Lankan Tamils have been displaced from their homes and denied basic human rights.
The second concern is the attacks on Tamil Nadu fishermen by the Sri Lankan navy on grounds of their encroaching into Sri Lankan territorial waters, beyond the 285 acres, uninhabited, Kachativu Island.
Records of the British India Government since 1876 have showed Kachativu as part of Ceylon. The Raja of Ramnad, in the then Madras Presidency, however, laid claim to the Island in the 1920s. Kachativu was recognised by India as Sri Lankan territory in agreements signed in 1974 and 1976.
The demarcation of the maritime boundary, under which India acknowledged Sri Lankan sovereignty over Kachativu, was based on the internationally recognised principle of the median line and in consonance with Article 15 of the Law of the Seas.
After the LTTE took control of Northern Sri Lanka, fishing in each other’s territorial waters became contentious. The Sri Lankan navy resorted to excessive and indiscriminate use of force. But in 2008, India and Sri Lanka agreed that excluding what Sri Lanka considers as “sensitive areas,” there would be “practical arrangements” to deal with bona fide Indian and Sri Lankan fishermen crossing the international boundary line.
Sri Lanka would be well advised to see that the spirit of this agreement is respected by its navy. The exchange of letters accompanying the 1976 agreement makes it clear that fishermen of either party shall not engage in fishing in the other’s “historic waters, the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zones”.
Inevitably, but sadly, triumphalism, rather than reconciliation, has characterised the reaction of sections of public opinion in Sri Lanka, ever since the bloody ethnic conflict ended in 2009.
There is broad agreement and substantive evidence, which has been endorsed by a UN Panel, set up by the Secretary General, of gross human rights violations by both the Sri Lankan Government and armed forces, on the one hand, and the LTTE, on the other, particularly as the ethnic conflict drew to a close. Both sides were found to have resorted to summary executions and disappearances.
The ethnic conflict left over 300,000 Tamils, described as “Internally Displaced Persons” (IDPs), in refugee camps. India has committed Rs 1,000 crore ($ 220 million) for rehabilitating the IDPs, including provision of materials like cement and GI sheets, for rebuilding homes. Large scale medical assistance has also been extended.
A programme to reconstruct 50,000 houses was commenced in 2010 and Tamil farmers assisted with supply of seeds, tractors and agricultural implements. A similar approach has marked India’s commitment to broaden ties across the Island nation.
India is Sri Lanka’s largest trading partner, with the Indian private and public sectors widely having a significant presence there. India has extended Lines of Credit of around $ 960 million for improving the tsunami-damaged Colombo-Matara rail link and for rolling stock and wagons for the northern railway line.
In a longer term perspective, India would be well advised to assist the Tamil population in Sri Lanka by setting up educational and vocational training institutes in northern and Eastern Sri Lanka.
The 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution, enacted pursuant to the 1987 Rajiv Gandhi-Jayawardene Accord provided for devolution of powers to Provinces, including to the Tamil dominated northern and the multi-ethnic eastern provinces.
President Rajapakse had averred that he would be prepared to go even beyond this framework to meet Tamil aspirations. The Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, Mr G. L. Peiris, while visiting India, agreed that “a devolution package, building upon the 13th Amendment, would contribute towards creating conditions for such reconciliation”.
President Rajapakse seems to be having second thoughts on his past assurances. Doubts are now being expressed about abiding by the provisions of the 13th Amendment, on crucial issues like law and order and lands. After having won landslide electoral triumph for ending of the ethnic conflict, President Rajapakse may end up losing the prospect of lasting harmony and amity, if political expediency prevails over statesmanship.
Following reports of human rights violations by Sri Lanka’s armed forces, 17 countries, including France, Germany, Mexico and UK moved a Resolution in the Human Rights Commission in May 2009, which sought to investigate reported human rights violations by the Sri Lankan armed forces. India, together with countries such as Brazil, Russia, China, South Africa and others had this move rejected.
These countries instead backed a Resolution, which was passed by 29 votes for and 12 against, which condemned the LTTE and called on the Sri Lanka Government to proceed with efforts for national reconciliation and resettlement of IDPs.
Given the contents of the recent report of the Panel constituted by the UNSG, which alludes to large scale violation of human rights by the Sri Lankan Government, the 2009 Resolution will inevitably be revisited and reviewed internationally.
India has spared no effort to assist and cooperate with Sri Lanka, to eliminate the LTTE and to deal with international pressures mounted on its neighbour in international forums.
Sri Lanka will hopefully realise the importance of abiding by the solemn assurances it has given to India of going beyond the 13th Amendment, to meet the legitimate aspirations of its Tamil population.
The author is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan.
http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/2070