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

291040Z Sep 05

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001714 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR S/ES, INR/MR, PA 
SA/INS (CAMP, DEAN) SA/PD (SCENSNY, ROGERS, PALLADINO); 
SSA/PAS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958:N/A 
TAGS: PHUM KPAO PTER OIIP PREL CE LTTE
SUBJECT:  Special Media Reaction:  E.U. Ban on LTTE Travel 
 
 
¶1. (U) Summary: The Sri Lankan media reacted strongly to the 
European Union's travel ban on the LTTE.  Mainstream and 
Sinhala nationalist media led with news of the ban, praising 
the move and speculating the decision could lead quickly to 
the EU's designation of the LTTE as a Foreign Terrorist 
Organization(FTO).  The Tamil and pro-LTTE press, 
conversely, criticized the travel ban and highlighted LTTE 
political wing leader S. Tamilselvan's stern warning that it 
would negatively affect the peace process.  End Summary. 
 
¶2. (U) English and Sinhala media led September 28 with 
reports of the EU's ban on travel to the EU by the LTTE, 
and the next day published reaction statements from the 
Sinhala nationalist parties Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) 
and Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) praising the ban and calling 
for the immediate designation of the LTTE as a terrorist 
organization in all European countries. The Sinhala 
nationalist press alleged "pro-Tiger" Norway had failed to 
influence the EU decision despite hard lobbying. The 
mainstream Daily Mirror was the only English paper to 
prominently publish the LTTE's response to the EU travel 
ban.  It reported Tiger political wing leader S. Tamilselvan 
saying September 28 at a press conference in Kilinochchi: 
"While the EU decision gives into the sinister motives of 
the government it also scuttles the stability of peace moves 
in Sri Lanka." 
 
¶3. (U)  English and Sinhala language editorialists also 
focused on the issue.  Government owned Daily News praised 
the "long overdue" EU travel ban on the LTTE and contended 
the EU should also ban suspected LTTE fund-raising 
organizations operating there, stopping short of naming the 
controversial Tamil Rehabilitation Organization (TRO).  The 
Daily News editor wrote, "Our position should not be seen as 
synonymous with the chauvinistic elements of Southern Sri 
Lanka, which are strongly resisting our efforts to solve our 
ethnic conflict by peaceful means. Rather we are in perfect 
agreement with the Co-Chairs who are calling on the LTTE to 
demonstrate their peaceful intentions, if any.  A moral 
obligation is cast on the global community. to bring the 
LTTE to the negotiating table."  Mainstream independent 
(though pro-UNP) Daily Mirror welcomed the ban, saying it 
"serves the cause of democracy and human rights that they 
seek to promote throughout the world."  The Mirror also 
called Sinhala nationalist forces to task, stating, "The 
greater responsibility devolves on the majority Sinhala 
community and their leaders. They should realize it had been 
the reluctance on their part, particularly those who have 
given leadership to extremist sections, to insure justice 
and equality to minorities that gave birth to separatist and 
terrorist movements."  The Sinhala nationalist Island called 
for "Three cheers for a declaration!" and contended the EU 
ban means "the LTTE can no longer justify terror on any 
grounds." 
 
¶4. (U)  The Sinhala sister papers of the English dailies 
editorialized much the same way, whereas the independent 
Lakbima (note: no English counterpart paper) made a more 
negative argument, comparing the alleged lethargic attitude 
of the West on terrorism before September 11 to the 
international community's repeated insistence now that the 
LTTE give up terrorism and join the democratic process. 
 
¶5.   (U) Pro-LTTE English and independent Tamil newspapers 
carried messages from the pro-LTTE Tamil National Alliance 
(TNA) and several international Tamil organizations 
condemning the EU decision and featuring Tamilselvan's 
comments on the matter.  Independent Thinakkural bannered, 
"Peace process will be badly affected," while mainstream 
independent Virakesari led with, "EU ban shocks LTTE." The 
pro-LTTE Tamil Net web site ran a more measured headline, 
saying: "Tamilselvan urges EU to reconsider stand on LTTE." 
Flagship Tamil newspaper Virakesari editorialized the EU was 
attempting to "disturb the peace," arguing the ban would 
encourage Sinhala Buddhist extremists to further repress the 
rights of Tamils.  Pro-LTTE Sudar Oli criticized the 
decision as biased towards the Sri Lankan government, and 
proposed that all Tamil associations in the EU organize 
peaceful demonstrations. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) Comment: The Sri Lankan media reacted predictably 
to news of the E.U. ban on travel.  English and Sinhala 
press responded very positively to the E.U. decision but 
called upon the international community to continue to 
intervene for the success of the peace process. The Sinhala 
press resisted its usual proclivity for lashing out in 
aggressive phrasing against the LTTE, instead praising the 
move while hoping for an EU FTO ban as well. The U.K.'s Tony 
Blair, with his country holding the EU presidency, received 
credit for the ban and for allegedly bypassing purported 
Norwegian objections. The Tamil press played the victim 
card, blaming the Sri Lankan government for unfairly biasing 
the international community against the Tamil struggle in an 
underhanded move, and hinting at a return to violence if 
these moves continued. We will continue to monitor Sri 
Lankan media reaction to events affecting the peace process. 
End Comment. 
 
 
Lunstead