Foreign Affairs Committee on April 29th, 2009

[Stephen Salewicz]

Just since January.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Since January. All right.

Mr. Dewar made mention of the ramifications in regard to war crimes. Are there any consequences for them that could result from the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, so they could understand, or their supporters could, the consequences of not listening to the counsel of the international community?

Have they asked for any assistance? When I asked about international assistance, I guess I was thinking about the UN, but have they come to the IMF and asked for any assistance?

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

Not that we know of.

[Ken Sunquist]

As I mentioned, I'm going to be at the Asian Development Bank meetings. We've been talking to our colleagues at the World Bank and other places, because all of us are looking at this in terms of what kind of development would be needed over the long term and short term, that is, reconstruction versus humanitarian aid. So we're all looking at that.

Clearly, funds and development will not flow if the situation on the ground precludes that. I'm not sure how you can get more blunt than that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Rahman.

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

I understand they're in discussions with the IMF for a loan, but it's not related to the conflict.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

It's not specific to this, okay.

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

But it's related to the economic crisis they're in, and I think they're asking for $1.9 billion. But again, it is unrelated to the conflict; it's more related to the global economic crisis.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Ms. Brown.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is more directed to the foreign affairs department than to CIDA, but thank you very much for the information you've provided.

The saddest thing I find about this whole thing is that we have two whole generations of children who have grown up knowing nothing but conflict. I represent a riding, Newmarket—Aurora, with a growing number of people from both the Sinhalese and the Tamil communities, who are moving into our riding. So I'm concerned, because I am hearing from both sides.

We had representatives from both the Tamil and the Sinhalese communities here, and I received very subjective answers to this question from both sides. So I'm hoping that perhaps you can provide me with something a little bit more objective. We know that a number of years ago, Norway was involved in brokering an agreement that lasted six years. And it is rather ironic now that Norway is the country that is on the outs with Sri Lanka.

I'm wondering if you could give us your opinion of the key elements in that agreement that gave it such “relative”—and I say “relative” in quotation marks—longevity in the course of this action. Is there any possibility that Canada can now be part of a mediation process that might implement some of those elements that were so positive, obviously, for both sides? Is there anything we can do to be the broker now?

[Ken Sunquist]

I would hope my colleagues could chip in here, because you're asking for a personal reflection of what we can do.

I had a very good colleague, who was the Norwegian ambassador from Sri Lanka, and he did take me through this process. But it was at a different time, in the sense that there was a stalemate in the fighting—neither side had the upper hand and neither side was under threat of imminent demise—so it was possible to get them talking in third countries. They weren't going to talk in Colombo or in Sri Lanka, and they had a lot of that early discussion in Norway. Norway and the Norwegian foreign service officers who brokered that are to be commended. So for a number of years, Norway kind of focused their aid, development, and political efforts on it and kept both sides talking.

The longevity of the accord was due to there being a stalemate. There were suicide bombings, and there was military, but no one had the upper hand. That all fell apart, of course, when the Sri Lankan military found that the Tigers were now at risk and they were able to smash them fairly quickly.

That's the historical side.

The way forward is clearly around the question of how you get representatives--and that's a good example. I know there are many people around this table who in the last few weeks have met with different groups from Sri Lanka, whether Tamils or Sinhalese. There have been discussions. Our efforts on the ground in Sri Lanka and our efforts here.... Someone made the comment that we have the single largest diaspora in the world. If you can get the moderates talking together about the betterment of their homelands, whether it's from here or there.... Can Canada do that? I think there has to be receptivity on the other side--which is what happened the first time--and right now it's not there. Hopefully it will be in two weeks' time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. Brown.

Monsieur Patry, vous avez cinq minutes.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you very much, gentlemen.

I'll go quite directly to the questions. I have two questions.

We all know that this current Sri Lankan government refuses to discuss any action like a ceasefire until the Tamil Tigers surrender their weapons or lose the war. I really think the current government wants to finish the job, and after that, what's going to happen? That is my question.

You have many IDP camps, and for sure with the IDP camps there will be international aid, and everything will be “fine”, if it can be fine in an IDP camp. I visited some in Azerbaijan before. Will these IDP camps be there forever? That's my question.

In a report from last March, the International Institute for Strategic Studies said:

But there is concern over insidious “Sinhalisation” as the displaced are resettled, and this may yet stall internationally led relief and reconstruction operations.

This is my concern.

My second concern is this. You said in your statement that CIDA really tried to help find the roots of the problem, and the roots go as far as independence, with the majority and the minority, and vice versa, education, jobs for the Tamils, and things like this. That's the root of the problem. But is there any hope? Are there any discussions? International aid should be subjected, in a sense, to a certain devolution for the Tamil population and relief for the Tamil population.

That's my question. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Patry.

Mr. Sunquist.

[Ken Sunquist]

That's a difficult question, but it is absolutely key, because I think for any conflict you find anywhere in the world, if years later people are still situated in IDP camps, you haven't solved the problem. So in fact that's where our efforts are.

Beyond the immediate concerns, we have to find out where we're going from there.

I'll let Leslie Norton, perhaps, from our international group comment.

[Leslie E. Norton, Director, Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Response Group (IRH-GHA), Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade]

Perhaps I'll just add a few comments.

A few months ago we heard murmurs from the government about these camps becoming welfare camps, suggesting that they were going to be more permanent. But I think there's been a lot of pressure put on the government to say that this is not the solution, or not the solution the international community would support.

With regard to the IDP camps now, currently, with the conflict under way, the needs of the IDPs are being met by the actors. There are many humanitarian actors on the ground outside the conflict zone who are trying to meet the needs of the IDPs. They're currently putting up 1,000 tents per day. There's a great influx of people, and there are some challenges currently in the coordination of the humanitarian response, but they're working through the coordination challenges.

One of the big challenges that remain is the standards. There are minimum standards--we call them the sphere standards--and they're standards about the amount of water per day and the size of the shelter. Currently we're trying to ensure that the standards are being met. We also understand that the military is quite present in the camps. The fact that we do have international people on the ground and we are getting this information, I think, does add to our ability to pressure the government.

[Bernard Patry, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I have another very quick question.

Is the Sri Lankan situation discussed within the Commonwealth body? We don't have any answer about this. Is the Commonwealth ready to take any action, or looking at any action against the government, if nothing is done after the end of the conflict?

[Ken Sunquist]

Yes. The discussions involve a number of Commonwealth countries. The first part of it is true, a number are willing to participate to do different things. On the Commonwealth as an institution secretariat, I don't know the answer, but I can find out and get back to you through the clerk.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Patry.

Mr. Lunney and Mr. Goldring on a split--that's not much time each.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Thank you very much.

It is important to be said that we have people coming to committee and suggestions being made--why doesn't Canada just move in and do this and do that and make demands? I think you said it very well in your report here when you said the government is citing safety and security in the conflict zone, that the UN has indicated that the Government of Sri Lanka has made it clear that the UN must stop making such requests, given that they will not be accepted. We can only do what the government will allow, short of invading the country.

Having said that, we appreciate what we have been doing in trying to engage with Sri Lanka and to help the Tamils and those officials who are on the ground right now in difficult circumstances.

My question really comes from Mr. Patry's perspective here. We have heard from some of the witnesses about “Sinhalisation”, if you want to call it that. With the changes in the state religion to make it Buddhism and the changes in educational requirements, which make it harder for people who aren't primarily Sinhalese speakers to get into higher education, to get government jobs, and so on, do we have a plan or some expertise through CIDA, through our development agencies, to break through some of these challenges and help restructure the government afterwards, or to encourage it with the kinds of steps that would be helpful in engaging a more comprehensive society that would allow everybody to participate?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

Mr. Rahman.

[Dr. Syed Rahman]

One of the things CIDA has been doing is to balance its assistance. We've maintained that distinct geographic and ethnic balance by supporting projects in Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslim areas of the region, so we are, in effect, active in the north and the east as well as in the centre. That's been a deliberate attempt.

On the answer to the question of whether it would be possible to do so, the one thing I can say is we continue to monitor the scenario, and then, depending upon how the whole government construct evolves and how the sectoral construct evolves--we hope with colleagues in Foreign Affairs--over time we'll have to make a judgment. But at this time it's a difficult judgment to make because we don't have enough information on the path this might take for us to ascertain exactly what's being done.

[Ken Sunquist]

If I could just quickly add, I did say they asked us not to make any further requests. That doesn't mean we're not going to. It's clear from our perspective that that is the first priority. The UN humanitarian chair was there. He did not get access. We will continue. The French and British foreign secretaries raised that issue. Mr. Cannon has raised it in the past and will raise it again. It's an ongoing issue that we have to resolve.

Please don't take it that just because they said we can't do it, that is the final line.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

We heard that from other witnesses.

[Ken Sunquist]

There is a misapprehension. There are a number of moderate Tamils in the Government of Sri Lanka right now, so it's not as though it's a clean divide of people based on religious or ethnic groups. There are ministers and there are different people. We can find people to work with who want the best for the people of the country.