In January, the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE announced a cessation of hostilities. Regrettably, the LTTE unilaterally resumed fighting in April. In August, the Sri Lankan Government announced wide-ranging constitutional proposals to shift power from the Central Government to eight newly constituted regional councils. The devolution package is the most forward-leaning government proposal to date to address the underlying political issues of the longstanding conflict. It is a bold step, which the United States has praised and one that we believe is an excellent starting point for consideration by all parties.

The LTTE failed to engage in a dialog with the government on this proposal, and subsequent LTTE attacks made it clear that the insurgent group has not abandoned its core demand for the establishment of a separate State in northeast Sri Lanka.

The LTTE is not the sole representative of the Tamil people, however, and representatives of mainstream Tamil and Muslim parties continue to support a process of negotiation and devolution. We believe the government's August proposal constitutes a solid basis for a constructive dialog for finding a peaceful solution.

Mr. Chairman, the United States supports a political resolution of Sri Lanka's longstanding ethnic conflict that is one, long lasting and comprehensive, two, protects the rights of all Sri Lankans, and three, preserves the unity of Sri Lanka. Consistent with that policy, we supported the Sri Lankan Government's efforts to negotiate a political settlement.

In February, Secretary Christopher publicly congratulated the Sri Lankan Government for achieving a cessation of hostilities. In April, we deplored the LTTE's resumption of hostilities, and urged the LTTE to return to the negotiating table. In August, we welcomed the government's political package.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the House of Representatives recently passed H.R. 181 on Sri Lanka, that similarly supports a political resolution of the longstanding ethnic conflict. I also want to stress that during the course of the Sri Lankan Government offensives, we have urged the government and LTTE to take all appropriate steps to protect civilians. We also condemned the recent LTTE massacres of over 128 innocent civilians, including children, in eastern Sri Lanka. Let me emphasize that the United States supports the efforts of relief agencies.

We have urged the Sri Lankan Government and LTTE to cooperate fully with relief agencies who are assisting persons displaced by the current fighting. We understand that the government's first shipments of relief supplies have reached the displaced persons, and we continue to monitor the situation closely.

The United States provides assistance to Tamil refugees through contributions to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross' South Asia Regional Program. This year, we provided $9 million U.S. dollars to UNHCR and $9.9 million to the ICRC. We also answered UNHCR's special appeals for Sri Lanka this year and last year, contributing an additional $500,000 both times.

Neither the UNHCR nor ICRC has issued a special appeal in response to the recent population movements in Sri Lanka. We will give serious consideration to any new request they may make.

Turning to human rights, we are working to ensure that the government keeps up the momentum on reforms. The human rights situation in Sri Lanka has improved considerably since the 19881990 period of violent conflict between the JVP, a Sinhalese Maoist Group, and the government. The ongoing conflict between the government and LTTE, however, is a continuing source of human rights abuses. Nevertheless, successive Sri Lankan Governments have made real progress in safeguarding human rights over the last 2 years. Disappearances, which averaged 15 a day in 1990, dropped to 210 over the entire year in 1992, 98 in 1993 and 10 last

year.

The three regional commissions established to investigate previous disappearances continue their investigations. Similarly, emergency regulations governing the behavior of the security forces have been strengthened and broadly applied.

In the wake of the LTTE's resumption of hostilities, however, serious human rights abuses occurred. The security forces were responsible for upwards of 50 extrajudicial killings of Tamils and over 30 disappearances. Torture remains a concern and the government censorship was imposed on all domestic news reports relating to military or police matters.

Over the last 2 months, the Sri Lankan Government has taken important steps to stem the worst abuses. Most importantly, 17 security force personnel were arrested for the killings of 21 Tamils in Colombo. We have no confirmation of any disappearances since mid-August. We continue to urge the Sri Lankan Government to keep its human rights improvements on track.

We cannot report similar progress in the LTTE controlled areas of Sri Lanka. The LTTE controls territory in northern and eastern Sri Lanka through authoritarian rule, denying the people under its control their civil liberties. The LTTE regularly carries out extrajudicial killings, including civilian massacres, assassinations, disappearances, arbitrary arrests, detentions and torture.

I have a page more. Is it all right if I continue? Thank you. Despite the longstanding conflict, Sri Lanka has maintained impressive economic growth rates over the last several years. Sri Lanka was the first South Asian nation to embark in 1977 on significant economic reforms. Since then, the reforms have broadened and a lasting peaceful resolution of the conflict, of course, would deliver even more significant economic benefits to Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan Government elected last year has pledged to continue market-oriented economic reforms. The country's program of privatization and private sector participation in infrastructure development may offer U.S. investors important opportunities in Sri Lanka. Actions, of course, speak louder than words, and current and potential investors are carefully gauging the government's implementation of economic reforms as well as the security environ

ment.

We wish to see Sri Lanka continue its progress on economic reform and we continue to promote U.S. trade and investment. In the past few years, we have signed a bilateral investment treaty, an intellectual property rights agreement and helped establish a U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Sri Lanka. Our embassy in Colombo just

held the second American trade fair, and I am pleased to say that 38 companies participated in this event.

The United States is projecting $12 million in development assistance for Sri Lanka in this current fiscal year. I would point out, Mr. Chairman, that our greatest impact on Sri Lanka comes, however, through U.S. trade with that nation. In 1994, Sri Lankan exports to the United States, mostly finished garments, totaled more than 1 billion U.S. dollars. The United States also provides a limited amount of other assistance, mostly in the form of IMET training. We have also provided training for counter-narcotics efforts.

Mr. Chairman, I am grateful to have had the chance to discuss the situation in and U.S. policy toward Sri Lanka. As my testimony has underscored, the important U.S. objectives of promoting peace, human rights and trade all come into play in Sri Lanka.

Armed conflict has been a tragic feature of the Sri Lankan political landscape for more than a decade. It has taken a severe toll on the people of Sri Lanka. It is a human tragedy that must be brought to a close. We believe that President Kumaratunga's package of proposed political reforms offers the best chance in many years for a peaceful, equitable end to the conflict, and we support those efforts.

We urge all of the parties in Sri Lanka to use her proposal as the basis for a serious dialog on peacemaking and political change. We hope then to see formal parliamentary approval for constitutional and other legal changes that will lead to peace, stability and a strengthened democratic system in Sri Lanka. Thank you very much.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lanpher appears in the appendix.]

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you very much, Ambassador. Ambassador, toward the conclusion of your remarks, I heard you say that you are supportive of the package of initiatives taken by the Sri Lankan Government.

Does that, I assume, include then the parts that relate to the devolution of autonomy to the country's various regions?

Mr. LANPHER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BEREUTER. That is a part of the August 1995 initiative, is that correct?

Mr. LANPHER. That is right. That is part of the President's initiative. My understanding is that it is moving toward consideration in the Sri Lankan Parliament, either later this month or next month. They have a special committee appointed in the Parliament.

Mr. BEREUTER. Ambassador, is it possible for the government to move even more quickly to implement the package, without an agreement from the LTTE, and then seek to draw out the moderate Tamil support? Or, is it essential that the Parliament, in their system of government, act first upon the initiative?

Mr. LANPHER. My own judgment is that it is going to take a substantial bit of time to develop a consensus in the Parliament to support the package. Included in the ruling coalition, President Kumaratunga's ruling coalition, there are Tamil representatives, members of the Parliament, non-LTTE Tamils. I think it is a consensus building sort of operation to get widespread national support.

I think the support is there, but it needs nurturing, and attention seems to have been diverted from these proposals by these military offensives.

Mr. BEREUTER. Is it our government's position that these devolution elements of the reform program can take place only after parliamentary action. Or, could they be implemented earlier, if it was the choice of their Administration?

Mr. LANPHER. I am not an expert on their rules, but I think it would take parliamentary approval.

Mr. BEREUTER. OK. How credible are the government's claims regarding its relief effort, including its assertion that it can do the job alone, "in cooperation with relief agencies that the government might enlist"?

Mr. LANPHER. I had a message as recently as this morning from our embassy in Colombo, which believes that the government can do it, working with organizations such as the ICRC and the UNHCR, plus non-governmental organizations on the scene.

The embassy describes the situation as serious, but the situation has been stabilized, and as I indicated in my testimony, certainly we have a confirmed report from the ICRC that a first boat load of relief supplies, food and medicine has gotten through and the ship is on its way back for a second shipment.

Mr. BEREUTER. You just mentioned the UNHCR. It is my understanding that thus far, the Sri Lankan Government has ruled out a role for the UNHCR, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Is that accurate, and if so, why have they ruled out a role for the UNHCR?

Mr. LANPHER. I think there was some hesitation in terms of the UNHCR role in this present offensive. I think some sensibilities may have been affected. But our information as of this morning from our embassy, who met yesterday with the UNHCR and the ICRC, is that the UNHCR is definitely engaged in part of the proc

ess.

Mr. BEREUTER. I see. On balance, Ambassador, are the Tamil complaints relating to human rights violations, based upon ethnicity, primarily, or are they based upon broader political and economic grievances?

Mr. LANPHER. Mr. Chairman, I cannot give you a judgment. I think it is probably a combination of the two, but certainly, minority rights has been a feature of this, going back in history a long time.

Mr. BEREUTER. We have a vote called, so I am going to see if we can switch to the ranking member after just one more question. I would like to know our intelligence assessments and State Department assessments of how much control the Indian Government exercises over its southern coastline and over local authorities in Tamil Nadu, since it has been said that a lot of support for the Tamil Tigers comes from that southernmost State in India?

Mr. LANPHER. I would have to go back and get the committee an assessment. We certainly believe that the Indian Government is not supporting or encouraging, in any way. Of course, the Indian Government was involved in the late 1980's, had an expeditionary force trying to bring order to the northeastern part of the country,

suffered 1,500 dead before they withdrew in 1990. They support, as we do, a peaceful negotiated political settlement.

Mr. BEREUTER. I would appreciate a more complete formal response than that, but bear in mind that I am saying not whether they support the Tamil

Mr. LANPHER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BEREUTER [continuing]. activities, but whether or not they are exercising effective control of their own coastline, in terms of its export of resources to the Tamil Tigers.

Mr. LANPHER. We will get you an answer on that.

Mr. BEREUTER. Thank you. I turn to the ranking member for questions.

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just on the last question, it would also be interesting to get your response to comment concerning the extent to which we think that the Tamil Tigers pose a security threat to the Government of India and the people of India at the present time.

Mr. LANPHER. Well, certainly going back, the Indians have requested the extradition of the LTTE leader Prabhakaran in connection with the assassination several years ago of Rajiv Gandhi. So, clearly, they believe that the LTTE does constitute a threat, at least in that sense.

Mr. BERMAN. Just to change the subject for a minute, I notice the ambassador from Sri Lanka is in the audience, and I think it is appropriate that we both extend to him and to the Government of Sri Lanka our appreciation for the tremendous work they did in helping to secure a Non-Proliferation Treaty extension last spring. They played a very special role there and helped to facilitate, I think, a very important accomplishment.

The issue of military assistance to Sri Lanka, are we looking at that again? What is our position on that?

Mr. LANPHER. Our position has been that we will supply, on a case-by-case basis, non-lethal military equipment. Because of our concerns over human rights over the past 10, 12 years, we have not licensed any lethal military equipment to Sri Lanka.

Mr. BERMAN. Are we reassessing that position at this time?

Mr. LANPHER. We keep this under constant review. To this date, we have not made a decision to supply lethal military assistance. Mr. BERMAN. Has any thought been given to inviting the President of Sri Lanka here for a State visit?

Mr. LANPHER. We have had that on the agenda. The President's schedule, through the end of next year, is completely booked. We are keeping that under review. President Clinton did meet with the Sri Lanka President in New York in connection with the 50th anniversary ceremonies.

Mr. BERMAN. Mr. Chairman, we are coming up on a vote, and I have no further questions.

Mr. BEREUTER. Ambassador, we do thank you for your testimony today. We have a recorded vote that is about to take place. Potentially two, I think it may only be one. I want to thank you very much for your testimony and ask you to follow up on a couple of things that we have asked you.