By Walter Jayawardhana
A pro-Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) faction of Canada’s Liberal Party went to its last convention held to elect a new leader with a condition that if they won a future liberal Party government should establish a Canadian Consul General’s office in Kilinochchi.
Another pro-LTTE faction wanted them to promise they would lift the ban on the Tamil Tigers in return for their support for the support for the new leader.
The pro-Tiger cliques were demanding that they be granted those promises if they were to put their support behind anybody who were competing to become the new Liberal Party leader.
But fortunately for Sri Lanka, those cliques were rejected revealed James Travers, columnist for the Toronto Star newspaper.
Writing in the issue of the Star of December 9 under the topic, Delegates as agents for ethnic interests, James Travers said, Ignatieff organizers say one Montreal faction put the price of its support on a future Liberal government establishing a consulate in the area fighting for independence. And Rae supporter Tarek Fatah this week exposed detailed discussions with Tamils allegedly offering to trade votes for a promise to delist Tiger guerrillas as terrorists.
Both campaigns say they rejected those and other ethnic overtures, claims strengthened by their conspicuous failure to win late-ballot converts. And there’s no evidence yet that anyone agreed to anything contrary to Canadian hegemony.
For a long time the pro-LTTE terrorist elements have established themselves in the Canadian Liberal Party to the extent that former Liberal Party Prime Minister (when he was the country’s Finance minister) Paul Martin and cabinet minister Maria Minna attended a Tamil New Year dinner held to collect funds for the terrorist group. It was in fact held by a front organization by the LTTE and the Liberal Party leaders attended the dinner despite a forewarning given by the Canadian High Commission in Colombo.
Writing about delegates who went to Montreal to take part in the Liberal Party Convention Travers said, a significant number of delegates went to Montreal as more than Liberals, or even Canadians they went as pressure points for ethnic and foreign interests. Groups with ties to Sri Lanka’s complex conflict are being singled out for their aggressive tactics.
The following is the full text of the column:
Just seven days after choosing a new leader, Liberals have a problem that isn’t Stéphane Dion. His first-week reviews, while not entirely flattering, glow in contrast to retrospectives on the peculiar process that made him an upset winner.
It’s clear now that unusual forces shaped a convention that contradicts conventional wisdom. Nothing from Friday night’s speeches to Saturday’s maneuvers follows patterns that for decades made leadership choices somewhat predictable.
What didn’t happen is what now makes Montreal so intriguing. A too-close-to-call contest wasn’t won or lost in the campaign’s last public performance, and the final decision wasn’t primarily about winning the coming election.
Did the media miss some portentous tea leaves? Absolutely. But so did the political pros. Backroom thinkers for both front-runners confirmed in interviews this week that many of their seminal assumptions were simply wrong.
Based on polling and intuition, Bob Rae strategists believed his potential to beat Stephen Harper, his speechmaking and delegate fragmentation would put the former Ontario premier on the last ballot. Instead, the convention’s top priority wasn’t the coming election, the most troubled speaker is now leader, and voter blocs made the difference between winning and losing. Miscalculations by the Michael Ignatieff camp include faith that the party would forgive his Israeli war crime comments, that the Liberal establishment would protect its interests, and that enough delegates abandoning failing candidates would flock to the favorite.
Instead, Ignatieff was punished, even critically wounded, on a first ballot that wasn’t just pro forma, the party’s palace guard didn’t respond to Gerard Kennedy’s early move to Dion, and delegates driven by their own agendas migrated en masse.
Underlying all this is another twist that would be darkly humorous if it weren’t heavy with serious implications: A convention once destined to be decided by the Québécois-as-a-nation debate was skewed by the evolving political realities of a country of multiple nations.
A significant number of delegates went to Montreal as more than Liberals, or even Canadians they went as pressure points for ethnic and foreign interests.
Groups with ties to Sri Lanka’s complex conflict are being singled out for their aggressive tactics. Ignatieff organizers say one Montreal faction put the price of its support on a future Liberal government establishing a consulate in the area fighting for independence. And Rae supporter Tarek Fatah this week exposed detailed discussions with Tamils allegedly offering to trade votes for a promise to delist Tiger guerrillas as terrorists.
Both campaigns say they rejected those and other ethnic overtures, claims strengthened by their conspicuous failure to win late-ballot converts. And there’s no evidence yet that anyone agreed to anything contrary to Canadian hegemony.
But even if tainted by sour grapes, reports of such blatant bargaining are troubling. If nothing else, they suggest a fresh layer of partisan grubbiness.
True, block voting is not a new phenomenon. It’s both an established fact in party nomination fights for heavily ethnic urban ridings and an unseemly consideration in national immigration policies.
What’s also true is that citizen engagement is a democratic cornerstone. Active involvement is a positive, not a negative.
Still, the political process makes its own assumptions. Among them are these: Voting is an act of individual conscience; ballots are more than raw capital to be accumulated for barter; and everyone shares an overarching interest in the outcome, no matter how different their opinions.
All of last weekend’s deviations from those norms are worrying, particularly the absence of a common purpose. Shocked by their own conclusions, some organizers now say a number of delegates were united only by their interest and were peering at the political process through a different prism.
Delegates arriving in Montreal with fixed agendas were more interested in finding a sympathetic champion than a leader or winner. Why? Because they are willing to gamble and it’s a safe bet that sooner or later whoever leads the party will become prime minister.
Framed in that context, the convention decision changes. It becomes less about candidate qualities and more about their responses to specific demands.
Another convention decision makes that dynamic more ominous. After considerable debate, Liberals voted to save delegated conventions from the scrap heap.
Once again, that’s not quite what it seems. In opting for drama over less-theatrical, one-member, one-vote contests, Liberals rescued the process more easily manipulated.
That looks more dangerous today than a week ago. A convention showcasing a healthy coalition of green and young delegates, a convention that bucked much of the establishment to choose a decidedly different leader, is now attracting less complimentary attention.
Moving forward, Stéphane Dion still has ample opportunity to prove the choice was wise. But Liberals looking back a week have reason to worry about the future.
Highway to Peace a fashion organised by the Sri Lanka Tourist Board and the United Nations Volunteers at H2O night club was a glitzy affair showcasing the latest collections from Lou Ching Wong, the Fabric Gallery, Vati fashions, Odel Unlimited, the Yoland Collection by Yoland Aluvihare Holm and a collection from the renowned Haute Couturier Roberto Henrichsen from Trash Couture. Trash couture is a popular label among Hollywood stars like JLO, Britney Spears, Angelina Jolie among several others.
There is a misperception prevailing amongst many people in Sri Lanka regarding the government and people of Tamil Nadu as patently demonstrating a heavy bias in favour of the LTTE. This may be due to a variety of reasons but primarily as a fall out of the anti Tamil riots that occurred in 1983 and the reaction of Tamil Nadu and the Indian government to the barbaric attack on innocent Tamils living in Colombo.
India accepted the Sri Lankan government’s invitation and moved in to help resolve the ethnic problem with increased devolution through the establishment of the Provincial Government system and the merger of the Northern and Eastern Provincial Councils. This helped to ease the conundrum that existed at the time and re-established friendly relations between the two countries.