Conflicting statements over Ban Ki-moon’s conversation with President

By Namini Wijedasa

Conflicting statements about Ban Ki-moon’s telephone call to President Mahinda Rajapaksa became an issue at the UN headquarters in New York last week, with a journalist asking during a press conference whether the UN secretary-general was happy about the “gloss” Sri Lanka had put on his conversation with the president.
The secretary-general called President Rajapaksa on Tuesday night. According to a statement from the president’s office, Ban Ki-moon congratulated him “on his outstanding victory in being elected for a second term in the recently concluded presidential election”. There is no reference to Ban Ki-moon asking about the arrest of Sarath Fonseka or other post-election events that have caused international concern.
In sharp contrast, a statement from Ban Ki-moon’s office said he had “expressed his concern about recent developments in Sri Lanka”. It noted that the secretary-general urged President Rajapaksa to keep his commitment to ensure concrete proposals for a political solution of issues with the Tamil community in the North and to ensure full accountability for any crimes against international humanitarian law or abuses of human rights.
It also stated that Ban Ki-moon “brought up the arrest of General Sarath Fonseka, and he urged the government to respect the due process of law and guarantee the personal safety of General Fonseka”. None of this was reflected in the statement issued by the Sri Lanka government. At the noon briefing on Friday, a journalist asked Martin Nesirky, UN spokesman, about differences in the two statements and the fact that President Rajapaksa’s six-paragraph statement does not mention Sarath Fonseka.
“It’s really like sort of cognitive dissonance, the two readouts,” the journalist remarked, in a transcript obtained by Lakbimanews. “Does the UN have any issue with the gloss that the government put on the call, that it was essentially a congratulatory one, and that the UN is happy with the government’s performance, which has, since this announcement, included tear gassing of non-violent protests in the streets and a threatened five-year sentence to Mr. Fonseka?” Nesirky responded that governments will characterise messages or phone calls as they see fit. “We’ve characterized and explained what happened in that phone call, and not least that the secretary-general very specifically brought up the arrest of General Fonseka, and that he urged the government to make sure that due process of law was respected, and indeed that the personal safety of General Fonseka was guaranteed,” he said. This, Nesirky emphasised, was “very clearly said”. “And I don’t think that I would want to go further in characterizing what the Government of Sri Lanka says about the phone call from its perspective,” he insisted.