Intrigue and Rebuttal

The quoted paragraph below is from Nittewa, a blog consisting of fun/paranoid journalism and slightly wack theories from Morquendi (not his real name), a Lankan blogger-of-note. Now that I'm following more local blogs, [no] thanks to Indi, I'm a) spending more time online and b) spurred to write more local stuff. I posted a slightly different version of this as a comment at Nittewa, but figured that 500 words merits its own push-button publication.

Right, so:

Why didn't the JVP make a noise when the US marines came to Sri Lanka, supposedly for Tsunami aid work? I'd have expected them to fight it to the bitter end. And in their anti-NGO propaganda why isn't the JVP targeting anything remotely connected to USAID? Why don't they talk about the American Imperialists in their speeches? Doesn't everyone (including myself) love to bash the Americans for all the world's evil? And didn't the JVP openly bash the Americans in the past? Why this sudden change of heart? Why is the JVP putting up with USAID's involvement in SLBC (the State Radio Broadcaster?)

Is the CIA paying them something to destabilize the Government of Sri Lanka?

Don't everyone get your sarongs in a twist. It's really quite simple; let Big Sister American Escapee explain it all for you.

The JVP is trying to appeal to the American government because they think that the US 'War on Terror' could be expanded to include/squelch the LTTE. Whether or not the US Government (not "Americans" but our wacko leaders) is "anti Tiger" isn't, I think, debatable. Among developed nations the US has one of the strongest political anti-Tiger stances and lists them as a terrorist group; my experiences with the US-SL diplomatic corps underline this stance.

In other words, it's not that the JVP are pro-American, not at all. They are just looking to fuck up the joint mechanism process, make the LTTE mad, provoke greater violence, and thereby justify getting US armed forces to violently quell the Tigers. The JVP has not figured out that a military solution to the conflict is neither possible nor morally tenable at this point—as evinced by their obvious bloodlust.

Is their reasoning flawed? Yes, for several reasons. The US Powers That Be are smart enough (though not very, it must be said) to see raw, power-hungry protectionist/socialist nationalism where it thrives, and to not militarily support it. These are not values that endear a political group to the [economic-]freedom-lovin', Marx-hatin', multiculturalism-lip-servicin' red-white-and-blue polity.

Secondly, the US-PTB (vide supra) quite openly state through their representatives here—for one, their official military attaché*—that they believe a military solution to the conflict is untenable. They're not going to send in the Marines unless it's for more tsunami rubble-clearing, school-buiding, and giant-amphibious-vehicle-driving.

Thirdly, America is in a precarious position in international politics. Bush and his gang have destroyed whatever economic and military respect we [might have] rated, turning the country from a world policeman and world business leader to, basically, world bully in both realms. In addition to that, the American military itself, despite being grossly overproportioned to begin with, is currently weak. Here you don't so much hear about it, but it’s front-page, head-Newsweek-article stuff over there: enlistment rates are way down, desertions are way up, and they're having to put active-duty folks on involuntary service-reassignment plans. Therefore: a weakened bully, more dangerous in some respects but certainly unable to take on more victims/terrorists.

Q.E.D.: the JVP as usual are (albeit pseudo-sophisticatedly) kidding themselves. This time, however, it has extremely sinister implications for the UPFA coalition, the peace process, the local political scene, and the international image of Sri Lanka. Not to mention actual people's lives.

*His name is (Col.) Rich Girven, and if you ever get a chance to meet him or hear him speak, go. Brilliant I say.