By Professor Stuart Rees

In answer to the comment ‘Stand up for Human Rights in Sri Lanka’, a young man wearing a sombrero and an Australian flag draped around his shoulders, responded, ‘Fuck human rights.’

It was 10:05 am on Thursday January 3rd, a hot blue sky day, perfect for the start of the Australia v. Sri Lanka Test Match. In the company of about thirty others, on a pathway some distance from the Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG), I was attempting to hand out leaflets which said, ‘Don’t Let Cricket Hide Genocide, Boycott Sri Lanka.’

The “fuck human rights” man was followed by other expletives from a few others, so several of the boycott protesters changed tack and tried to be informative, ‘40,000 Tamils slaughtered, do you care ?’ A middle aged couple hurried by, looked straight ahead but answered ‘No we don’t care, we’re going to the cricket.’

Others strode along stony faced, some apparently dismayed by the sight of the protest, some obviously embarrassed at the thought that if they took our pamphlets they might be filmed by the accompanying television cameramen.

To add to the ‘40,000 slaughtered’ plea, I tried, ‘Journalists have disappeared and others have been killed for criticizing the Sri Lankan Government.’ Most people stared ahead and kept on walking but a large, swarthy man in short shorts responded ,’That’s bullshit’ and a few meters behind a smaller man said, ‘Don’t support you mate.’

A more understandable response came from groups of young men daubed in green and yellow, some wearing wigs of curled hair in the same colours. They seemed to think the protesters were supporters of the Sri Lankan team, a perception which provoked their patriotic ‘Ossie, Ossie Ossie, Oi, Oi, Oi.’

With a few exceptions most cricket followers did not seem to want to know about the lives of Sri Lankan Tamils, let alone about any past slaughter.

The task of informing the public had been made more difficult when security guards representing the Moore Park Trust forbade the erection of placards outside a main entrance to the ground which they said was SCG Trust Land. The leaders of the protest were directed to move to a pathway 400 metres distant.

This official Sydney reaction, ‘ Don’t let human rights interfere with cricket’ contrasted with the response of officialdom at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) on the opening of the Boxing Day Test when a similar Boycott Sri Lanka protest was permitted at a prominent entrance to the hallowed MCG. There are no regulations about political demonstrations outside the MCG.

That Melbournites might be more sympathetic than Sydneysiders towards protests against the appearance of the Sri Lanka team, could be implied from an Age poll taken on the day after the Boxing Day test . A sample of 650 readers of that newspaper were asked ‘ Should Sri Lanka be banned from world cricket?’ 66 per cent said yes. 34 per cent said no.

The case for boycotting Sri Lanka was listed on pamphlets taken by only a handful of people streaming towards the SCG. At least that small number could have read that the UN has called for a war crimes investigation of the Sri Lankan government over the murder of 40,000 innocent Tamil civilians, that the persecution of Tamils continues and largely explains the numbers of Tamils seeking asylum in Australia.

Former Sydney Morning Herald cricket writer, the late Peter Roebuck, wrote that a TV exposé of the execution, rape and abuse of Tamils had ‘provoked deep consternation’ among Australian cricketers. A heading in the London Guardian said, ‘A Sri Lankan Scandal; Cricket and the Killing Fields.’

The post Boycotting Sri Lanka is not cricket appeared first on Sydney Peace Foundation.

We make this statement in terms of our commitment to the needs of a common humanity, in particular regarding the suffering of citizens within Syria and regarding those who have become refugees.

In terms of the Syrian people’s legitimate demands for democratic reform, we encourage everyone to aim at celebrating those differences which would nurture a flourishing democracy. Those differences would include religious beliefs and loyalties, ethnic origin and culture. But they might also be differences in terms of traditions of hospitality, dress, food, music, great art and poetry.

We also encourage celebration of a common ground in terms of universal human rights, the sovereignty of a nation and responsibilities for the preservation of Syria’s unique heritage and for stewardship of the environment.

Our thoughts are dominated by a commitment to non violence, ‘ the law for Life’ as defined by Mahatma Gandhi. Such non violence includes not only a cease fire in the present conflict but also an end to the smuggling of arms inside and outside the country.

Non violence also means an end to authoritarianism of any kind, whether in dictatorship, hatred for minority groups or domestic violence. Only dialogue and commitment to non violence can start a process of peacebuilding and healing within Syria.

The plight of Syrian refugees must be high on the agenda of any peace proposals. Turkey’s welcoming and caring for refugees illustrates the commitment to a common humanity which prompts this statement. We urge affluent developed countries to consult and support Turkey and any other host countries for Syrian refugees as to the short term resources required to make the numerous tent cities livable.

As for the long term prospects for refugees, that depends on an end to the violence and persecution within Syria; and a commitment by all parties not only to peace but also to peace with justice?

December 6th, 2012

The post Syria: Refugees and a Way to Peace appeared first on Sydney Peace Foundation.