In mid 2008, the Sri Lankan government began a military offensive against LTTE rebels. Civilians trapped by the fighting face a double peril: if they flee, they risk being killed by the LTTE; if they stay, they must face the government’s bombardment. All this has prompted some humanitarian advocates to invoke the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (RtoP) principle. Are they right to do so?
With the emergence of swine flu in April 2009, international actors have quickly scrambled to develop and implement health measures in an attempt to minimise or eliminate the possibility of a full-blow pandemic. In particular, during these early stages states and the World Health Organization (WHO) appear to have begun the process of engaging swine flu with political priority. This raises two interrelated points: is swine flu being securitised and if so, why?
The current swine flu outbreak takes place amidst ongoing international efforts to establish a system of global health security. While considerable progress towards this goal has been made, serious unresolved problems mean that the concept and practice of global health security is likely to face severe challenges.
The Sri Lankan government’s victory at the Western Provincial Council election held on April 25, 2009 can only have added to its confidence that it is proceeding on the popular path with regard to the war in the north. At these elections the ruling alliance secured 65 percent of the popular vote, which is a huge margin of victory. But what of the international response?
Proponents of “responsibility to protect” or “R2P” have been linking their concept in recent weeks to the waning civil war in Sri Lanka. Are they right to do so? Talk of R2P may well distract from what should be a clear and unified demand to both sides: Cease fire.
South Africa’s general election which was held on April 22 has yielded the proverbial ‘win-win’ situation for all the participants except the tiny parties, who failed to impress voters and whose futures now hang in the balance. Although this outcome-and the peaceful and well-organised poll-augur well for democracy in the former apartheid state, many still believe that the country’s fifteen year-old democracy may be in peril.
When Asian leaders attending a summit meeeting – including the prime ministers of China and Japan – had to be whisked out of a besieged luxury Pattaya hotel by helicopter on 11 April, it was official: Thailand is in deep political trouble.
The controversial imprisonment by Iranian authorities of Roxana Saveri, an American citizen, has occurred just as there was an expectation of a thaw in Iranian-US relations. In March, president Obama used the occasion of the Iranian New Year to send a promising message to Tehran. Although, he did not impress every faction of the Iranian political elite, his commitment to a “new approach” was seen as a potential breakthrough for Iranian-US relations.
The Sri Lankan government is losing the ideological battle while it is winning the military battle. This has tremendous implications for policymaking. Even if the government completely vanquishes the LTTE, the government could be pressured into an unfair and unsustainable political settlement due to the deeply entrenched ethnic analysis.
It is likely in the coming days that the Tamil Tigers lose their last piece of territory. However, without a political agreement to address the grievances of Sri Lanka’s Tamil minority, Sri Lanka will continue to be beset by a different, and perhaps more intractable, type of conflict.
Before you download your free e-book, please consider donating to support open access publishing.
E-IR is an independent non-profit publisher run by an all volunteer team. Your donations allow us to invest in new open access titles and pay our bandwidth bills to ensure we keep our existing titles free to view. Any amount, in any currency, is appreciated. Many thanks!
Donations are voluntary and not required to download the e-book - your link to download is below.