Sri Lanka’s untold truths on Mullivaikkal, LTTE war crimes, and Geneva’s missteps—exposing suppressed evidence, biased diplomacy, and the politics of justice.
Lord Naseby’s timely revelation of British diplomatic cables—sent from Colombo to London between January and May 2009—presented Sri Lanka with a golden chance to expose the misinformation being spread by the UN and diaspora groups regarding the final phase of the war against the LTTE. Despite their redactions, these cables—along with Lt. Col. Anthony Gash’s reports—challenged the UNHRC’s narrative of 40,000 civilian deaths in Mullivaikkal, offering a credible figure of approximately 7,000, corroborated by a UN survey conducted in the Vanni from August 2008 to May 2009. Yet, the Sri Lankan government failed to deploy this material effectively in the global arena.
One critical piece of evidence remains the February 16, 2009 letter by Norwegian Ambassador Tore Hattrem to presidential advisor Basil Rajapaksa. The message revealed the LTTE had been repeatedly approached through multiple channels with proposals to release civilians trapped in Tiger-controlled zones, but had ignored these appeals. Hattrem’s candid admission—”it doesn’t seem to be likely that the LTTE will agree with this in the near future”—confirms the deliberate use of civilians as human shields. Despite its explosive potential, this letter was never adequately presented to the United Nations.
Following Michelle Bachelet’s tenure (2018–2022), current UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk may be unaware of this suppressed evidence. Geneva insiders and Tamil diaspora lobbies have, for years, shaped the global narrative, often omitting inconvenient truths that contradict allegations against the Sri Lankan state.
Notably, the British Tamil Forum and wider diaspora networks never condemned LTTE tactics that held Tamil civilians hostage. The 2007 Vanni offensive saw tens of thousands of civilians fleeing toward government-held areas. In February that year, the LTTE detained two UN workers attempting to assist fleeing civilians. Rather than confronting the rebels, the UN’s Colombo office engaged in secret talks to free its staff—without even notifying its New York headquarters, a revelation confirmed by the UN’s own spokesperson, Michele Montas.
Earlier High Commissioners like Navanethem Pillay also failed to demonstrate impartiality. In 2016, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein visited Colombo shortly after Yahapalanaya leaders Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe co-sponsored a US-led resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC—seen as a betrayal of the country’s war heroes. The resolution ignored the origin of the conflict: the LTTE’s offensive on August 11, 2006, which marked the start of Eelam War IV. Even the Nordic truce monitors blamed the LTTE for the breakout of hostilities.
The final phase saw LTTE chief Velupillai Prabhakaran forcing civilians to move with retreating cadres. By January 2009, with defeat looming, Prabhakaran resorted to hiding among the very civilians he had used as political pawns. This same man had orchestrated the assassination of Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Now, with Volker Türk slated to visit Colombo, the stakes are high. A Parliament press release dated June 5, 2025, misidentified Türk’s title, mistakenly calling him the High Commissioner of the “International Commission on Human Rights”—a gaffe that remains uncorrected. Türk’s visit comes as BTF General Secretary V. Ravi Kumar, a former LTTE member, writes to him demanding visits to Mullivaikkal and Chemmani. Kumar also calls for attention to the Nanthikadal lagoon—the site of the LTTE’s final defeat.
Rather than resist scrutiny, the National People’s Power (NPP) government should take the initiative. Grant access to all sites—Mullivaikkal, Chemmani, Nanthikadal—and let the facts speak. Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s retired Army, Navy, and Air Force leadership must unite to present a clear, accurate account of the war. No internal divisions should hinder the opportunity to finally set the record straight.
Equally vital is the need to reject the selective outrage of the so-called human rights defenders. Western powers and Tamil nationalist groups that once proclaimed the LTTE as sole representatives of Tamil people ignored the rebels’ systemic use of civilian hostages. Even as the LTTE abducted and murdered dissenters, the UN office in Colombo tried to broker secret deals instead of publicly condemning these crimes.
It is also deeply inappropriate to compare Sri Lanka’s war to Israel’s ongoing campaign in Gaza. The UN’s Tom Fletcher made such a comparison at the Security Council, ignoring the qualitative and contextual differences. Unlike the IDF’s indiscriminate force, Sri Lanka acted against a terrorist group after years of failed negotiations. Still, successive UK governments facilitated the LTTE’s operations abroad, including permitting its International Secretariat in London.
One of Sri Lanka’s most respected diplomats, the late Jayantha Dhanapala, spoke to this hypocrisy during the LLRC hearings. He urged accountability not just from states like Sri Lanka but from international actors who financed and armed terrorist movements while decrying the consequences. His words still echo today: there is a responsibility to protect not only one’s civilians but those caught in proxy wars enabled by global power structures.
Wartime U.S. military advisor Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith, too, countered post-war allegations by defending the Army against claims of executing surrendering LTTE cadres—claims that were weaponized during Sri Lanka’s 2010 election to discredit military leaders.
Similarly, the Tamil diaspora remained silent on child conscription by the LTTE. It was only with the defeat of the group that this practice was ended. Thousands of Tamil children were thrust into battle, with NGOs and Western governments offering minimal resistance. Ironically, it was the Sri Lankan military—supported by U.S. intelligence—that ended this horror, not the international community.
Despite this, Geneva’s fixation on sites like Mannar persists. The Mannar mass grave, discovered in 2018, led to international uproar. But carbon testing conducted in early 2019 revealed the bones were centuries old—dating back to Portuguese and Dutch colonial periods. Yet, UNHRC reports under Michelle Bachelet referenced the site to imply wartime crimes.
The official section from a 2018 UN report even acknowledged that systematic access to grave sites was needed, and called for strengthening forensic protocols. The irony? When the system worked—when forensic truth prevailed—it contradicted the very accusations being made.
As Volker Türk’s visit looms, Sri Lanka faces a critical juncture. It must confront falsehoods not by denial, but by boldly presenting truth. Let every grave be examined, every letter unearthed, every witness heard. Because in this war of narratives, silence is complicity, and only truth can secure justice.
