Statecraft vs. Sentiment: Why Tamils are Winning the Moral Argument but Losing the Legal Battle

A 2024 Advocacy Report on the Administrative Failure to Counter Sri Lankan Intelligence—and How to Fix It.

Here is the Advocacy Report, designed for Tamil human rights professionals, activists, and political leaders. It focuses on analyzing the state-level machinery of the Sri Lankan Government (SLG) and proposing strategic counteractions.

CLICK HERE FOR TAMIL தமிழ்

Editor's Note

(Wimal Navaratnam, Human Rights Defender)

For too long, the Tamil struggle for justice has been fought primarily in the streets and in the political corridors, relying on moral outrage and democratic ideals. While these efforts have yielded crucial symbolic victories—such as the recognition of genocide by various global bodies—our strategic failure lies in the unseen administrative battleground.

The analysis contained within this report serves as a profound wake-up call. The Sri Lankan State, through specialized units like the International Security Cooperation Division (ISC), has successfully weaponized bureaucracy. They treat our human rights pleas not as political issues, but as technical security threats, thereby sustaining the unjust proscription of the LTTE and effectively criminalizing legitimate diaspora political activities.

The lesson from 2024 is stark: The State fights with paper and procedure; we must respond with superior paper and procedure. We must professionalize our advocacy, consolidate our legal resources, and submit technically robust "Shadow Reports" that preempt the SLG's narratives. We need fewer flags waved in protest and more audits filed with the EU's GSP+ monitoring mechanisms.

The moral high ground is ours; it is time to capture the administrative high ground to secure lasting justice. I urge all political leaders and activists to adopt this strategic blueprint immediately.

Countering State-Level Diplomacy & Reclaiming the Narrative

To: Tamil Human Rights Professionals, Activists, and Political Leaders

Date: December 4, 2024

Subject: Analysis of SLG Lobbying Mechanisms (2024) and Strategic Recommendations for Tamil Advocacy

1. Executive Summary

In 2024, the Sri Lankan Government (SLG) employed a highly organized, state-level bureaucratic machine to counter Tamil advocacy. While Tamil activists secured symbolic political victories (e.g., Genocide recognition in Canada), the SLG successfully dominated the administrative and security domains within the EU and North America. By leveraging the International Security Cooperation Division (ISC), the SLG ensured the continued proscription of the LTTE, effectively criminalizing aspects of diaspora activism and neutralizing Tamil leverage. This report analyzes these mechanisms and proposes a shift from "political lobbying" to "bureaucratic counter-advocacy."

2. SLG Lobbying Actions & Outcomes (2024)

The SLG’s approach in 2024 was defined by systematic, scheduled, and intelligence-led interventions. Unlike the ad-hoc nature of some diaspora activism, the SLG operated on a strict administrative calendar.

2.1 The International Security Cooperation Division (ISC) Operations

The ISC served as the operational hub, coordinating intelligence between Colombo and foreign missions.

EU Operations:

Action: The ISC prepared and filed biannual technical submissions to the European Union on March 31, 2024, and October 4, 2024.
Outcome: The EU announced the retention of the LTTE on the terrorist list in February 2024.
Impact: This renewal validates the SLG's narrative that "Tamil activism equals terrorism," allowing the SLG to bypass human rights demands by citing national security concerns.

Canadian Operations:

Action: On March 22, 2024, the ISC submitted intelligence dossiers to Canadian authorities to support the retention of the LTTE listing.
Counter-Genocide Measures: The ISC coordinated specific diplomatic missions to counter the Canadian Parliament's recognition of Tamil Genocide. This included rebuttals to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement on May 18 (Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day) and diplomatic protests regarding the construction of the Tamil Genocide Monument in Brampton (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sri Lanka, 2024).
Surveillance: The SLG actively monitored diaspora activities on "significant days" (e.g., May 18, November 27) to identify patterns they could classify as "radicalization" in their reports to foreign governments.

3. The Advocacy Gap: Why Tamils Failed

The continued proscription of the LTTE, despite the absence of military conflict since 2009, represents a significant failure in Tamil advocacy.

3.1 Misaligned Targets (Politicians vs. Bureaucrats)

The Tamil Approach: Tamil advocacy often targets Elected Officials (MPs, MEPs). This yields political statements and symbolic resolutions (e.g., Brampton Monument, Genocide declarations).
The SLG Approach: The SLG targets Unelected Bureaucrats and Intelligence Agencies (e.g., the EU Council's CP 931 Working Party).
The Failure: Terrorist listings are technical/legal decisions, not purely political ones. While Tamil activists take photos with MPs, SLG officials submit evidence logs to the Home Office or State Department. Tamils are winning the political argument but losing the legal/security argument.

3.2 The "Reactive" Trap

The SLG submits reports on a fixed biannual schedule (March/October). Tamil organizations often react after a ban is renewed or after a statement is released. There is a lack of a synchronized "Counter-Submission" calendar that matches the EU’s review cycles.

3.3 Fragmentation of Narrative

The SLG speaks with one voice (The ISC). The diaspora speaks with many. The SLG effectively uses this fragmentation to paint the diaspora as "disorganized" or "infiltrated by extremists," thereby validating the need for security monitoring.

4. Strategic Roadmap: Counter-Actions for 2025

To counter the ISC's efficacy, Tamil Human Rights professionals must professionalize their advocacy to match the state’s administrative capacity.

4.1 Strategy A: The "Shadow Report" Mechanism

Objective: Match the ISC’s biannual submissions with equal professional weight.

Action: Establish a "Tamil Technical Secretariat" tasked with submitting formal reports to the EU and Canada on March 1 and September 1 (one month before SLG submissions).
Content: These reports should not just recount history. They must explicitly debunk the "security threat" narrative.

Prove: Diaspora funds are going to humanitarian aid, education, and legal battles, not arms.
Challenge: Provide evidence of SLG using "counter-terrorism" laws to seize Tamil lands (Sinhalization) under the guise of security.

4.2 Strategy B: Lawfare (Legal Advocacy)

Objective: Challenge the proscription on legal grounds, not just moral ones.

Action: Initiate judicial reviews in the EU Court of Justice. The argument must shift from "The LTTE were freedom fighters" (which is politically charged) to "There is no functional organization today; the ban effectively punishes a minority community's political speech."
Precedent: Utilize the Hamas v. Council (2014) procedural arguments where listings were annulled due to lack of updated evidence. Tamils must force the EU to prove current activity, which the ISC effectively fabricates or exaggerates.

4.3 Strategy C: Leveraging GSP+ and IMF Conditionality

Objective: Hit the SLG where it hurts—the economy.

Context: The EU GSP+ trade concession depends on human rights compliance.
Action: Instead of general protests, file specific grievances regarding the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and the Online Safety Bill.
Narrative Shift: Do not just say "Sri Lanka committed genocide." Say "Sri Lanka is currently violating GSP+ conditions by using the ISC to surveil and intimidate EU citizens of Tamil descent." This frames the issue as a violation of European sovereignty and norms.

5. Conclusion & Immediate Next Steps

The SLG’s success in 2024 was not due to moral superiority, but administrative discipline. The ISC’s ability to coordinate inputs across missions and submit timely intelligence allows them to control the "security" narrative.

5.1 What Tamils Must Learn from the 2024 Diplomatic Offensive

The key lesson is the need to shift from a reactive, protest-driven model to a proactive, intelligence-based model. The SLG's success hinges on their ability to create an official, verifiable paper trail of "current security threats," which successfully overrides the political goodwill Tamil advocacy may generate.

The Power of Bureaucracy: Terrorist listings (EU, Canada) are maintained by intelligence agencies and bureaucratic review committees (like the EU Council’s working groups), not primarily by politicians. These bodies require continuous, formal, and technically sound submissions, not just media coverage or protests.
The Asymmetry of Resources: The SLG utilizes the resources of a full state apparatus—embassies, intelligence agencies (ISC), and professional lawyers—operating with a unified mandate and ample budget. Tamil advocacy, fragmented and reliant on voluntary efforts, must pool resources to match this professionalism.
The Narrative Trap: The moment an activist or organization is linked to a proscribed entity, the SLG has successfully framed the human rights struggle as a security threat. Tamils must consciously decouple human rights documentation and political advocacy from the security concerns of the host nation by demonstrating transparent governance and non-violent objectives.

5.2 Immediate Next Step for Leaders: Drafting the Counter-Submission Template

To immediately apply the lessons learned, the most crucial counteraction is to initiate a formal, synchronized "Shadow Reporting" mechanism that pre-empts the SLG's submissions. This requires a professional template focused on disproving current threats and documenting current abuses under the guise of security.

6. Proposed Template Structure: EU Counter-Submission (2026 Cycle)

This template is designed to counter the ISC’s biannual technical reports by addressing the EU's core concerns: security, finance, and human rights compliance (GSP+).

Document Title: Formal Submission to the Council of the European Union Regarding the Retention of the LTTE on the EU List of Persons, Groups and Entities Involved in Terrorist Acts

Section	Focus	Objective & Content
I. Executive Summary (The Argument)	The Decoupling	A concise statement that the continued listing is based on outdated/unsubstantiated intelligence, not current threat assessment, and serves only to mask ongoing human rights violations by the SLG.
II. Legal Standing & Representation	Professionalism	Detail the consolidated legal team/coalition submitting the report, confirming adherence to EU submission guidelines.
III. Counter-Intelligence Dossier (The Debunk)	Security & Finance	Directly refute the standard SLG allegations: * Financial Transparency: Provide audited reports showing that diaspora funding flows exclusively to humanitarian, educational, and legal defense activities. * Non-Violence Pledge: Formal declaration from all submitting parties confirming adherence to non-violence and democratic principles. * Absence of Operational Capacity: Evidence proving no LTTE military or operational command structure exists globally since 2009.
IV. Human Rights and GSP+ Compliance Dossier	The Current Violation	Pivot the focus from historical conflict to current administrative abuse: * PTA and Online Safety Bill: Detail specific instances where these laws have been used against Tamil journalists, land rights activists, and human rights defenders in 2024/2025. * Land Grabs/Sinhalization: Provide GIS mapping data and land registry proof demonstrating SLG agencies (e.g., Archaeology Department, military) seizing Tamil lands under the pretext of "security" or "archaeological preservation."
V. Conclusion and Recommendation	The Action	Formal request for the EU Council to: 1. De-list the LTTE due to lack of current evidence of threat. 2. Initiate GSP+ sanctions review based on evidence of misuse of counter-terrorism laws.

7. Disclaimer

This Advocacy Report is a strategic analysis and assessment based on publicly available information, reported diplomatic activities, and the specific data points provided regarding the Sri Lankan Ministry of Foreign Affairs' International Security Cooperation Division (ISC) operations in 2024.

Purpose: This report is intended solely for the strategic guidance of Tamil human rights professionals, activists, and political leaders to inform their advocacy and policy decisions. It is designed to expose and counter state-level diplomatic actions.
Limitation of Data: While the analysis is founded on known diplomatic outcomes (e.g., EU proscription renewal, Canadian genocide countering efforts), specific details regarding the ISC's submissions (March 31 and October 4, 2024) are cited from an assumed internal or leaked government document, as provided to the report generator. Verification of the complete contents of these specific submissions is subject to state secrecy.
Legal Standing: This report is not a formal legal submission to any international body, nor does it constitute legal advice. Recommendations (e.g., Lawfare, Counter-Submission structure) are strategic proposals requiring further professional development, funding, and execution by qualified legal counsel and specialized technical teams.
Liability: The authors and editor assume no liability for the misinterpretation or misuse of the strategic recommendations contained herein.

8. Editor's Note

(Wimal Navaratnam, Human Rights Defender)

9. Methodology

This report employs a Strategic Gap Analysis combined with Intelligence Mapping to assess the effectiveness and failures of both the SLG and Tamil advocacy efforts in 2024.

9.1 Data Sources and Inputs

The analysis relies on three primary categories of input:

Provided Government Data (SLG Operations): Specific, highly technical inputs regarding the 2024 actions of the ISC, including precise dates for biannual submissions to the EU (March 31 and October 4) and targeted submissions to Canada (March 22) to counter proscription delisting and genocide recognition.
Publicly Documented International Outcomes: Verification of key results, including the EU Council Decision confirming the LTTE proscription renewal (February 2024) and public diplomatic responses by the SLG to Canadian political statements regarding Tamil Genocide.
Human Rights Monitoring Context: Existing reports from organizations monitoring Sri Lanka regarding the misuse of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), land appropriations, and the operational framework of the ISC, to provide context for the SLG's narrative framing.

9.2 Analytical Framework

The report's findings were generated using the following steps:

Deconstruction of SLG Strategy: The ISC's activities were deconstructed to identify their core operational calendar (biannual submissions) and their primary target audience (security/intelligence agencies, not political figures).
Mapping Advocacy Targets: Tamil advocacy efforts were mapped against the SLG's targets to identify the Misaligned Targets (Section 3.1). The finding was that Tamil efforts were disproportionately directed toward politicians, while the SLG targeted the technical bureaucracy responsible for listing decisions.
Impact Assessment: The continued LTTE proscription served as the primary metric for assessing the SLG's success. The resulting impact on the diaspora was analyzed through the lens of criminalization and resource paralysis.
Strategic Recommendations (The Blueprint): Based on the identified gap, recommendations were formulated to mirror and counter the SLG’s bureaucratic structure. The proposed Shadow Reporting Mechanism (Section 4.1) directly addresses the SLG’s operational calendar, ensuring Tamil input is received prior to the Council's review, effectively neutralizing the reactive trap.

References

Council of the European Union. (2024, January 16). Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/332 updating the list of persons, groups and entities covered by Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism. Official Journal of the European Union. Link
Government of Canada. (2024, July 23). Statement by the Prime Minister to mark 41 years since Black July. Office of the Prime Minister. Link
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sri Lanka. (2024). Performance of the International Security Cooperation Division: Inputs on LTTE Proscription. Internal Government Report/Progress Update.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sri Lanka. (2024, August 16). Foreign Minister Ali Sabry summons the Canadian High Commissioner to register Sri Lanka’s strongest objections on the so-called construction of a Tamil Genocide Monument. Link
Public Safety Canada. (2024). Currently listed entities: Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Link

Search This Blog