This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001330 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR SA, SA/INS, S/CT 
NSC FOR E. MILLARD 
 
E.O. 12958:  DECL:  07-30-13 
TAGS: PGOV PTER PINS CE NO LTTE
SUBJECT:  Tigers say report on plan to vacate base is 
false, but contacts see thaw in their hard-line stance 
 
Refs:  (A) FBIS Reston Va DTG 300259Z Jul 03 
 
-      (B) FBIS Reston Va DTG 300245Z Jul 03 
-      (C) SA/INS-Colombo 07-30-03 class e-mail sequence 
-      (D) Colombo 1325, and previous 
 
(U) Classified by James F. Entwistle, Charge d'Affaires. 
Reasons 1.5 (b, d). 
 
¶1.  (C) SUMMARY:  The Tigers have denied a press report 
that they plan to vacate a new forward base in the east. 
The monitors, who have ruled the base violates the 
ceasefire accord, say they no indication that the group 
is vacating the site; GoN facilitators are looking into 
the matter.  Nonetheless, pro-Tiger MPs have told us 
that they think the group may vacate the site soon. 
While the Tigers are extremely unpredictable, we would 
be surprised if they pushed this matter much further. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) DENIAL OF TV REPORT:  The Liberation Tigers of 
Tamil Eelam (LTTE) organization has flatly denied that 
it plans to vacate a forward base it has established 
near the town of Trincomalee in eastern Sri Lanka. 
(Note:  For further details re the controversy over the 
base, which, confusingly, is variously referred to as 
the "Kinniya," "Wan Ela," "Manrasakulam," and 
"Kurankupanchan" camp -- see Ref D.)  The denial, which 
was posted on "TamilNet," the pro-LTTE website on 
July 30, was in response to a news report carried late 
July 29 on the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation 
(SLBC).  (Note:  The SLBC report was also carried by the 
DAILY NEWS, a major English-language newspaper, on 
July 30.) In the report, the SLBC said LTTE Political 
Chief S.P. Thamilchelvam had traveled to the Trincomalee 
area to discuss the issue with LTTE cadre after ordering 
the full dismantlement of the base within the next 72 
hours.  In its denial, TamilNet also quoted the LTTE's 
area commanders as stating that Thamilchelvam had not in 
fact visited the Trincomalee area on July 29. 
(Note:  In a rare foray away from the LTTE-occupied 
Wanni region, Thamilchelvam has been visiting the 
Batticaloa area the past several days.  It seems likely 
that he may stop in Trincomalee today, July 30, based on 
what we are hearing.) 
 
¶3.  (C) MONITORS CANNOT CONFIRM LTTE PLANS:  For its 
part, the Norwegian-run Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission 
(SLMM), which recently ruled that the LTTE's base had 
been established in violation of the February 2002 
ceasefire accord, said it had received no word from the 
group re its plans for the base.  Kurt Spur, Acting 
Chief of the SLMM's Trincomalee office, told us that as 
of mid-day July 30 the LTTE base was still there and 
there were no signs of that it was being dismantled. 
In a conversation with poloff, Hagrup Haukland, the 
SLMM's Colombo-based Deputy Chief, said the monitors 
continue to try to "reach out" to the LTTE on the issue, 
but the group "is not reciprocating."  As he has stated 
to the press on numerous occasions of late, Haukland 
went on to remark that the LTTE's failure to vacate the 
base promptly could lead the SLMM to "reconsider how it 
does business."  When pressed by polchief re this 
seeming threat, Haukland replied that the SLMM had no 
plans to take any sort of drastic action over the issue, 
such as withdrawing from Sri Lanka. 
 
¶4.  (C) The Norwegian government facilitators are also 
looking into the situation.  Norwegian Ambassador Hans 
Brattskar told the Charge that he could not confirm the 
SLBC report that the Tigers had decided to vacate the 
base.  He said he would look into the veracity of the 
report (see Ref C). 
 
¶5.  (C) LTTE RELAXING STANCE?:  On the other hand, two 
Tamil politicians with close links to the LTTE have told 
us that they have heard that the group may be 
reconsidering its stance on the base.  Joseph 
Pararajahsingham and Gajan Ponnambalam, Tamil National 
Alliance (TNA) MPs, told us that they had heard that the 
LTTE planned to withdraw from the base in the next 
several days.  Ponnambalam said the group was just 
trying to "make a point" via its establishment of the 
base, not undermine the peace process.  (Note:  Suiting 
the opaque ways of the LTTE and its supporters, 
Ponnambalam was vague on what this "point" might be.) 
Pararajahsingham said the group certainly did not want 
to provoke any sort of armed confrontation with the 
government over the issue.  Polchief underscored to both 
TNA MPs that, in the interest of the peace process, it 
was absolutely vital that both parties fully honor the 
rulings of the SLMM. 
 
¶6.  (C) (((Note:  Re the GSL's stance on this matter, 
there is no indication thus far that the government is 
planning any sort of military action meant to force the 
LTTE from the base.  In public, the government has 
sought to downplay the situation, seemingly going to 
lengths not to ramp up the pressure on the LTTE.  In 
private, however, the GSL has underlined that it wants 
the matter resolved as soon as possible -- see Ref C. 
End Note.))) 
 
¶7.  (C) COMMENT:  While the Tigers are very, very 
unpredictable, we would be surprised if they pushed this 
matter much further.  Based on our soundings, the group 
seems to be getting the message that its new base in the 
east has harmed its relationship with the SLMM and 
potentially courts some sort of armed confrontation with 
the GSL.  If the Tigers do throw in their cards, it will 
fit into their tactical style of trying to push the 
envelope as far as it goes only to retreat in the face 
of resistance.  All that said, the group's leadership is 
mercurial to say the least and, although the base has no 
apparent strategic value, it is possible the LTTE sees 
some sort of obscure symbolic value in holding it.  END 
COMMENT. 
 
ENTWISTLE