The Rajapaksa Regime's Role in Ending Sri Lanka's Civil War: A Controversial Legacy

The conclusion of the Sri Lankan Civil War in May 2009 marked a pivotal moment in the nation’s history, bringing to an end nearly three decades of violent conflict between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). Under the leadership of President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his brother, Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the government initiated a decisive military campaign that ultimately led to the defeat of the LTTE. While this victory was celebrated by many as a triumph over terrorism, it also sparked widespread allegations of human rights abuses and war crimes, casting a long shadow over the Rajapaksa regime's legacy.

The final phase of the war, often referred to as the "Humanitarian Operation," was characterized by intense military offensives in the northern regions of Sri Lanka, particularly in the Vanni area. Government forces systematically dismantled LTTE strongholds, pushing the rebels and hundreds of thousands of civilians into an increasingly confined area. By May 2009, the LTTE’s leadership was decimated, and its leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran, was killed. The government declared victory, and Sri Lanka entered a new era, free from the specter of armed separatism.

However, the price of this victory remains deeply contested. Reports from international organizations, including the United Nations and Human Rights Watch, alleged that both sides committed serious violations of international humanitarian law. The Rajapaksa regime faced accusations of indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas, targeting hospitals and no-fire zones, and executing surrendering LTTE combatants. The government consistently denied these allegations, insisting that its operations adhered to a zero-civilian-casualty policy and were necessary to eradicate a ruthless terrorist organization.

One of the most contentious aspects of the conflict's final months was the plight of civilians trapped in the war zone. The United Nations estimated that around 40,000 civilians may have died during this period, though exact figures remain elusive due to limited access to the affected areas. Survivors reported harrowing experiences, including forced displacement, inadequate access to food and medical care, and being used as human shields by the LTTE. The government’s imposition of a media blackout and restrictions on humanitarian organizations fueled further concerns about the scale of civilian suffering.

The end of the war also marked the beginning of a humanitarian and political crisis. Hundreds of thousands of displaced Tamil civilians were confined to overcrowded and poorly resourced camps, facing restrictions on movement and limited prospects for resettlement. Allegations of torture, sexual violence, and extrajudicial killings during and after the war added to the regime's tarnished image. International pressure mounted, with calls for independent investigations into alleged war crimes. However, the Rajapaksa administration resisted external scrutiny, emphasizing the importance of sovereignty and portraying such inquiries as interference in Sri Lanka's internal affairs.

Domestically, the Rajapaksa regime's popularity soared in the immediate aftermath of the war. Many in the Sinhala-majority population viewed the government as having delivered a decisive blow to terrorism, restoring peace and enabling economic development. Major infrastructure projects were launched, and the regime consolidated its power through constitutional amendments and control over key institutions. Critics, however, argued that this period saw a significant erosion of democratic norms, with increased militarization, suppression of dissent, and the marginalization of minority communities.

The international community's response to the human rights controversies was mixed. Some countries, particularly those in the Global South, praised Sri Lanka's military success and backed its claims of sovereignty. Others, including Western nations and human rights organizations, pushed for accountability. The United Nations Human Rights Council adopted resolutions urging Sri Lanka to investigate alleged violations, but progress on domestic accountability mechanisms remained slow and largely symbolic.

More than a decade later, the legacy of the Rajapaksa regime’s role in ending the civil war continues to polarize Sri Lanka. For some, it represents a heroic chapter in the nation’s struggle against terrorism. For others, it underscores the enduring challenges of reconciliation, justice, and accountability. The scars of the conflict, both physical and emotional, remain visible in the affected communities, and the search for truth and healing continues to shape Sri Lanka’s political and social landscape.

As Sri Lanka grapples with its post-war challenges, the events of 2009 serve as a stark reminder of the complexities involved in achieving peace through military means. While the Rajapaksa regime’s decisive actions brought an end to a brutal conflict, the unresolved questions about human rights violations and the plight of minority communities highlight the need for a more inclusive and accountable approach to nation-building.