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 03 COLOMBO 000870 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR D, SA, SA/INS, EUR/NB, EUR/ERA, EAP/J 
NSC FOR E. MILLARD 
 
E.O. 12958:  DECL:  05/25/14 
TAGS: PREL PTER EAID PGOV CE JA NO EU IN LTTE
SUBJECT:  Sri Lanka:  Upcoming meeting of the Co-Chairs 
of the Tokyo Process in Brussels 
 
Refs:  Colombo 827, and previous 
 
(U) Classified by Ambassador Jeffrey J. Lunstead. 
Reasons 1.5 (b, d). 
 
¶1.  (C) SUMMARY:  On June 1, the four Co-Chairs (Norway, 
Japan, the U.S., and EU) of the Tokyo Process are 
scheduled to meet in Brussels.  The meeting is an 
important one and will build on recent visits to Sri 
Lanka by the Norwegian facilitators, GoJ Special Envoy 
Akashi, and SA A/S Rocca.  Recent news regarding the 
peace process has been largely positive, with the GSL 
and the LTTE underscoring their interest in resuming 
talks later this year.  That said, the situation is 
fragile due to political instability in the south and 
the difficulty of dealing with the LTTE given its 
continuing track record of aggressive behavior.  In the 
meantime, on the assistance side activities in the North 
and East slowed down in the lead up to elections and 
period of conflict between the LTTE and the Karuna 
faction.  These activities have now resumed.  However, 
to make an impact in the near to medium term, the number 
of humanitarian assistance and rehabilitation activities 
need to increase, speed up and be better coordinated to 
demonstrate wider impact.  This will require additional 
donor mechanisms such as a NERF-like funding scheme. 
 
¶2.  (C) SUMMARY (Continued):  We believe that the June 1 
meeting should send a strong signal of international 
support for the peace process, especially for the 
parties' declared commitment to resuming talks. 
Participants should also call for strict adherence to 
the ceasefire.  At the same time, the LTTE should be 
urged to act responsibly and to respect human rights 
fully.  In light of both sides' public commitment to 
resume talks, Co-Chairs should call for an acceleration 
of relief and rehabilitation assistance delivery to the 
north and east while noting that full-scale 
reconstruction awaits progress in the peace talks. 
Overall, we think a strong message of international 
backing for the positive trends tentatively emerging in 
Sri Lanka can play a key role in convincing the parties 
to return to the negotiating table and make substantive 
progress there.  END SUMMARY. 
 
--------------------------- 
Review of Current Situation 
--------------------------- 
 
¶3.  (C) The four Co-Chairs of the Tokyo Process are 
scheduled to meet in Brussels on June 1.  The meeting is 
an important one, and it will build on recent visits to 
Sri Lanka by Norwegian FM Petersen and deputy FM 
Helgesen, Japanese Special Envoy Akashi, and A/S Rocca 
(see Reftels).  The news regarding the peace process is 
largely positive, based on the results of those visits. 
Sri Lankan government interlocutors, including President 
Kumaratunga, for example, reiterated their interest in 
resuming talks later this year.  (Talks have been on 
hold since April 2003.)  In meetings with the Norwegians 
and the Japanese, the Tigers also said they were on 
board for eventual talks.  The Norwegians have made 
clear that arranging negotiations will take at least 
several months.  While the exact agenda of possible 
talks has not yet been set, the GSL appears to have 
agreed to LTTE demands to confine initial discussions to 
the issue of how to come to an interim agreement on 
power-sharing in the north and east, as well as how to 
accelerate assistance to those in need.  Discussion of a 
possible final settlement would take place further down 
the line. 
 
¶4.  (C) Despite the generally good news on the peace 
front, there are still many potential obstacles to real 
progress.  The political situation in the south is 
confusing and volatile, for example.  Based on the 
results of the recent election, parties that are 
skeptical of the peace process, such as the radical JVP 
and the JHU (led by Buddhist monks), have entered 
Parliament in large numbers.  At the same time, the pro- 
LTTE Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the other extreme, 
is also represented in Parliament in unprecedented 
numbers.  Moreover, it remains unclear whether the 
United National Party (UNP), the main opposition party, 
will play ball with the government.  Although the UNP 
launched the peace process in 2001, it may be so 
resentful of its recent defeat in the parliamentary 
election that it will seek to undermine the government 
any chance it gets.  Finally, the government, which 
remains in minority status in Parliament, continues to 
give off hints that it may try to change the 
Constitution to get rid of the executive presidency in 
favor of a full-fledged Westminster-type system. 
(President Kumaratunga faces term-limits in 2005-2006 
and wants to remain in control as prime minister.)  If 
the GSL moves forward with this idea, it will create a 
flashpoint of controversy, which will probably work to 
put the peace process on the back burner for some time. 
 
¶5.  (C) The LTTE remains a serious obstacle for the 
peace process.  As mentioned, the group has made the 
right soundings about wanting to get back to talks. 
That said, its behavior on the ground continues to be 
poor.  Killings of Tiger opponents continue and 
harassment is endemic, and child recruitment has begun 
again.  Emblematic of the LTTE's recent behavior was its 
brazen and successful effort to fix the election of TNA 
candidates in the recent election.  Given this track 
record, it is difficult to say with a high degree of 
certainty how serious the Tigers are about moving 
forward on peace negotiations.  Nonetheless, the group 
seems to feel that it is getting what it wants from the 
peace process at this time and there are no reports that 
it wants to break out of the current situation. 
 
¶6.  (C) On the assistance side, the election clearly 
indicated that the Sri Lankan people wanted a greater 
demonstration of the tangible benefits of peace.  In 
order for this impact to be realized, greater planning 
and coordination among donors and between donors and the 
GSL, at the national, provincial and district levels is 
needed to assure that the most appropriate assistance is 
targeted to the areas in greatest need in the most 
timely manner.  Both the Government and the LTTE need to 
be encouraged to make progress on key indicators laid 
out in the Tokyo declaration to ensure that the funds 
pledged to meet the development needs of Sri Lanka are 
released. 
 
----------------------------------- 
Calibrating the Message in Brussels 
----------------------------------- 
 
¶7.  (C) As was done during their February 17 meeting in 
Washington, we believe that the Co-Chairs should use the 
June 1 meeting to send a strong signal of international 
support for the peace process, as well as call for 
strict adherence to the ceasefire.  Parties should be 
urged to resume talks in a structured, rational way, and 
in a timely manner.  While it was positive that the 
April parliamentary elections were the most peaceful in 
years, it is also important that the parties in the 
south try to bridge differences and work together in the 
national interest.  Both sides need to avoid 
inflammatory rhetoric and appeals based on ethnic and 
religious intolerance, so as not to undermine the gains 
made by the peace process over the past two and a half 
years. 
 
¶8.  (C) Regarding the LTTE, the group should be urged to 
act responsibly and to stop the killings, abductions, 
harassment, child recruitment, etc. In addition, it is 
imperative that international and local implementing 
partners are able to function independently and without 
fear or intimidation in providing assistance.  The LTTE 
must understand that its pattern of behavior has been 
the single most important reason that donors have been 
unable to provide increased developmental assistance to 
the north and east.  Nonetheless, given recent positive 
signals about a possible resumption of talks, the Co- 
Chairs should underscore that they believe that the 
delivery of relief and rehabilitation (humanitarian) 
assistance should be accelerated to all needy areas of 
Sri Lanka, especially the north and east, while noting 
that full-scale assistance will require further progress 
in the peace talks, as laid out in the Tokyo 
Declaration.  The Co-Chairs should also call on the GSL 
to organize itself effectively so that assistance 
delivery can be provided expeditiously and equitably to 
those in need. 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶9.  (C) Overall, we think a strong message of 
international backing for the positive trends emerging 
in Sri Lanka can play a key role in convincing the 
parties to return to the negotiating table and make 
progress there.  Coming after the recent visits by 
Petersen, Akashi, and A/S Rocca and this week's Solheim 
visit, which closely followed the April election, the 
June 1 meeting is well-timed to deliver this signal of 
international resolve. 
 
¶10.  (C) COMMENT (Continued):  At the same time, the 
June 1 meeting comes at an important time in South Asia 
given the recent Indian elections.  Although there is no 
indication that the new government in New Delhi plans 
any shift way from its support for Sri Lanka's peace 
process, the abrupt change in power has been somewhat 
disconcerting to many in Sri Lanka.  Many observers, for 
example, feel that the Congress Party takes a more hard- 
line view on how to deal with the LTTE (given the 1991 
assassination of Rajiv Gandhi by the LTTE).  By again 
publicly underscoring their support for the peace 
process, the Co-Chairs will assure Sri Lankans that the 
international community continues to back the process. 
By doing so, the Co-Chairs will also be sending a 
gentle, indirect message to India that it should remain 
on board with its own support.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶11.  (U) Minimize considered. 
 
LUNSTEAD