The several thousand Tamil civilians being placed in jeopardy by the LTTE as the end game draws near shows the LTTE's callous disregard for its loyal supporting cast of civilians/low level cadres drawn into the separatist Eelam cause.
International Human Rights (HR) groups, Media and Diplomats are the most vocal as they pressure Sri Lanka for a Ceasefire, and not quite loudly enough, for the LTTE to lay down arms. HR groups who are spearheading these calls should surely be familiar by now with the LTTE's operational strategies, and that the LTTE has no concern whatever for the people under its control, other than how these people could be used in order for the LTTE to survive, through ceasefire or truce, for future rounds of guerilla war.
The HR groups and Media must also know they are being used as pawns by the terror outfits to assist them in the new "human shield" tactic. The traditional position of HR groups has been as critics of the Oppressors, usually governments, and as supporters of the oppressed. However, the "human shield" necessitates HR groups to reassess their own position and strategies, as it becomes clearer that they must develop more nuanced alternate strategies for supporting civilians in the control of terror groups while alienating the terror group itself. Is this possible? If not, what options do they have?
Obviously, the aim should be to liberate and free as many civilians as can be managed, and to ride it out for as long as possible WITHOUT giving hope to the LTTE that "intervention" in the guise of saving the civilians will come to pass. In practical terms this "wait out" has also to be limited so that the military advantage gained is not lost. Whatever be the case, the final confrontation could no doubt be a harsh one, and would be the point at which the world would have to take the moral stand and in this case, support the Sri Lanka government. Under no circumstances should the "human shield" consideration supercede the routing of the LTTE at this final stage. That would be inexcusable, for it would leave a terrible example of the world's incompetence, and lead to more widespread use of the human shield as a terror tactic.
This dilemma and the only position left for HR groups to adopt at such junctures would negate the very raison d'etre of the HR groups. Therefore, rather than working as critics of governments, HR groups should assist and cooperate with the world's nations in looking for better, more sophisticated ways by which to have civilians can be extricated from the stranglehold of the terror groups, without falling into the trap of simply criticizing governments that are in the process of striving hard to handle very tricky disaster situations. Bringing criticism and sanctions against governments would only lead to HR groups being treated as unwelcome, and would result in extending civilian suffering from beyond the camp environment to other populations spread across the entirety of these countries.
Add to this the special responsibility of the media in this day and age of competitive and immediate communications. Their's is a very special role as the watchdogs of the Fourth Estate, and a difficult one at the best of times to keep ethical and objective balance in reportage. It becomes especially so in times of economic stress as is being experienced globally today.
HR activists and the Media should weigh in the fact that if the LTTE is allowed to succeed in using the "human shield" in Sri Lanka, this will fast become the newest ploy used in copycat style by intransigent terror groups the world over. Sri Lanka with its long conflict and LTTE terrorist dimension, has become the laboratory for the world's terror outfits today as they hone their tactics and learn from each other. In this scenario, it is critical that the world does not allow this terrorist experiment to yield the 'wrong' results. The world cannot afford not to get it RIGHT this time around.
It is unlikely that the LTTE will allow any more civilians to escape. The dilemma for all concerned then, is how to deal with the inevitable killings as the army squeezes the "human shield" in, through a day-to-day perhaps man-to-man fight. The 70,000 or more civilians who stayed behind may also be armed. Would the end justify the means as it did in Hiroshima? In this case, the common sense answer, sadly, is "Yes" - for not only Sri Lanka, but for the whole world. And yet, it will leave a scar that will forever remain in Lanka's history....the price the nation will have to pay for having kept the LTTE going for so long, especially through a foolish Ceasefure Agreement, and the price for regaining security of the island while hopefully eliminating one expert terror group from the world.
As always, prevention is better than cure, so the real answer to terrorism is to nip things in the bud so that terror groups do not have the chance to start up. Sri Lanka's is the first democratic government of the modern world forced to face the predicament of the "human shield", and deserves some special understanding and support instead of the one-way assault that it received at the hands of witnesses from the Human Rights, Media and Diplomatic branches of the international community at the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing a few days ago
