At the height of Eelam War IV, as the WikiLeaks material reveals, American officials in Colombo as well as Washington and New York were bombarded with email demands and/or information from ardent Tamil advocates concerned about the deteriorating situation of the LTTE and the populace corralled within Thamiīilam’sdeclining terrain.

The very diversity of fervent messages had an impact on the thinking of key American policy makers in 2009. The extremism of the vast majority of messages was immediately dismissed. But, in unplanned manner, these missiles opened the door for the US personnel of the State Department to give credence to the claims of the moderate few. This is the implication one can draw from Blake’s Despatch No. 314 of 20 March 2009.

Shortly before 11 PM on Wednesday evening, after a debate lasting over 11 hours in the British House of Commons, the Speaker announced “397 for the Ayes and 223 for the Nays. So the Ayes have it.” Prime Minister David Cameron (DC), in his address had forcefully stated his case for the need to “use all force against the woman raping, Muslim-murdering medieval monsters of IS”, who he warned were a “death cult” that was “plotting to kill us and radicalise our children right now”. Sixty six Labour MPs voted with the government. Within 57 minutes of the announcement, the first two RAF Tornado jets of the six based in Cyprus were dropping their bomb loads over ISIL territory. DC had finally got his war. Two more Tornados and six Typhoons are due to boost RAF’s fleet in Cyprus shortly.

In your editorial of 1st December you referred to the Prevention of Terrorism Act. That set me thinking with the question why it was proposed to our government and acceded to by us, to do away with the Prevention of Terrorism Act? Curiously, it is proposed by some of the main proponents of UN Resolution such as the US and UK and supported by India, while themselves having in their law, anti terrorist enactments such as the Patriots Law etc. in the US which are even more intrusive than our terrorism law, all intended to preserve their democracies and uphold the Human Rights of their people. On the other hand, countries like France who interceded with Sri Lanka government to have spared the Terrorists here, are now gearing themselves to go all guns blazing against ISIS Terrorism. In such circumstances why is it that they are insisting that Sri Lanka should do away with this law, while warning other countries of the possibility of Terrorism spilling over to other parts of the world too?

The former Government of Sri Lanka proscribed 16 Diaspora entities and 424 individuals under United Nations Security Resolution (UNSCR) 1373. UNSCR 1373 is implemented under UN Act No. 45 of 1968. Under terms of the text of this Resolution, the Council “decided that all States should prevent and suppress the financing of terrorism, as well as criminalize the willful provision or collection of funds for such acts. The funds, financial assets and economic resources of those who commit or attempt to commit terrorist acts or participate in or facilitate the commission of terrorist acts and of persons and entities acting on behalf of terrorists should also be frozen without delay”.