Chennai, Jan 2: MDMK General Secretary Vaiko, a staunch supporter of Eelam Tamils, today said Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should not participate in the February 4 Independence Day celebrations of Sri Lanka.
Talking to reporters here, he said the Prime Minister should not participate in the Independence Day celebrations in the wake of the Sri Lanka Supreme Court ruling nullifying the 1987 Indo-Lanka agreement. Stating that the Island government, along with India, had opposed setting up of a UN office in Colombo, Mr Vaiko said under these circumstances, the Prime Minister should not participate in the function. He said amid increased hostilities and killing of innocent people there, India had sent military and defence experts to Colombo to give guidance and advice to them.
Recalling the massacre of 61 girls in Sencholai and killing of 17 Tamil volunteers of French Tsunami relief camp, Mr Vaiko alleged India had failed to condemn them.
''When confrontation is on, India is giving radars to Sri Lankan Air force, which has been killing innocent women and children through air strikes.'' ''It is an unpardonable and unjustifiable action of the Indian government,'' he said, adding sending defence experts and signing of an agreement between the Indian and Lankan Navies, showed that India was getting involved by using its own military and defence experts.
When the UN found that there was gross violation of human rights and suggested opening of a UN office in Colombo, India, at the behest of Sri Lanka, was one of the three nations to oppose it, putting to naught the farsighted maritime policy and the foreign policy envisaged by late Prime Ministers Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi, he charged.
''India opposing to set up an office of UN in Colombo, is a painful and shameful decision,'' he alleged and condemned the Centre for not raising its voice against nullifying the 1987 Indo-Lanka accord.
When pointed out that only the merger of North and Eastern parts were nullified by the Lankan court, Mr Vaiko said it would mean that the ''entire agreement would not hold any water.''