pmaitra
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2009
- Messages
- 33,262
- Likes
- 19,594
I rarely see you trolling, but everyone needs a break.Some of the comments are indicating a Tamil-vs.-"India" scenario
UN Vote on alleged war crimes by Sri Lankan Army and LTTE
- Thread starter The Messiah
- Start date
- Status
Granted that SL has had a terrible HR record vis a vis Tamil lankans. But lets look at the end result.
By supporting a UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka are we making lives better for Lankan tamils or increasing hostility against them among lankans. The next step after this is the possibility of economic sanctions against Lanka if it does not comply with the "demands" made.
Look at this way, if Iran had not prevented the OIC and by extension UNHRC in censuring India on HR issues in Kashmir, would that make India be more soft or agressive on Kashmir. I would say it would be natural for India to become more agressive, particularly against those countries that supported the resolution.
The END GOAL is to improve the lives and integration of Lankan Tamils, and that can only happen if we tackle this at a BILATERAL level. AFterall, that is what we are telling Pakistan to do as well regarding the Kashmir issue.
When we talk to SL bilaterally, then we can push as much muscle/economic power to get the lankan govt. to provide better facilities and rights to the tamils there. By taking this matter to the UN, we will not get any positive attitude for SL on Tamils and also unnecessarily antagonise Sri Lanka.
If you look at the voting pattern, there was a significant number of countries that voted against and the resolution would still have carried through if India had abstained.
In favour (24): Austria, Belgium, Benin, Cameroon, Chile, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Italy, Libya, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, United States and Uruguay.
Against (15): Bangladesh, China, Congo, Cuba, Ecuador, Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Mauritania, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and Uganda.
Abstentions (8): Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia and Senegal.
By supporting a UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka are we making lives better for Lankan tamils or increasing hostility against them among lankans. The next step after this is the possibility of economic sanctions against Lanka if it does not comply with the "demands" made.
Look at this way, if Iran had not prevented the OIC and by extension UNHRC in censuring India on HR issues in Kashmir, would that make India be more soft or agressive on Kashmir. I would say it would be natural for India to become more agressive, particularly against those countries that supported the resolution.
The END GOAL is to improve the lives and integration of Lankan Tamils, and that can only happen if we tackle this at a BILATERAL level. AFterall, that is what we are telling Pakistan to do as well regarding the Kashmir issue.
When we talk to SL bilaterally, then we can push as much muscle/economic power to get the lankan govt. to provide better facilities and rights to the tamils there. By taking this matter to the UN, we will not get any positive attitude for SL on Tamils and also unnecessarily antagonise Sri Lanka.
If you look at the voting pattern, there was a significant number of countries that voted against and the resolution would still have carried through if India had abstained.
In favour (24): Austria, Belgium, Benin, Cameroon, Chile, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Italy, Libya, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Poland, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, United States and Uruguay.
Against (15): Bangladesh, China, Congo, Cuba, Ecuador, Indonesia, Kuwait, Maldives, Mauritania, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Thailand and Uganda.
Abstentions (8): Angola, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Djibouti, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Malaysia and Senegal.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
+ holding the criminals who did heinous war crimes accountable for their actions. There is no "moving on" here.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
Read the full article.
Its as if giving an ear to the legitimate concerns of the 7% of the population of "Indians" is a grave crime and that the Govt must be sent to the darkest reaches of hell for doing such an unforgivable crime.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
We Tamils would support a non binding resolution on Tibet too.Some of the comments are indicating a Tamil-vs.-"India" scenario
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 12,835
- Likes
- 7,762
So what i had said before has come true. That the resolution should not be delayed and should be implemented ASAP. My worst fears that this time might be used by the SLG to clean up the mess(or eradicate the Tamils there) can happen too.
So any one who called me a troll for saying that the resolution should not give un-necessary reasons for delay can shove their dicks up their ass.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 12,835
- Likes
- 7,762
India has done what it does best, pleasing no one- voting against the SL irritating SL, Adding the last minute amendment to make the draft useless irritating the TN people, Not using it for political leverage for anything from the US
People here are speaking about the India taking on the China scenerio too much without realising the ground reality. How are we gonna take on the chinese if we have a diplomacy like this
If you are not gonna keep the SL out of the reach of the Chicoms, with a powerful Indian navy, then you cant think of your grand strategic plans. Thats just non sense.
People here are speaking about the India taking on the China scenerio too much without realising the ground reality. How are we gonna take on the chinese if we have a diplomacy like this
If you are not gonna keep the SL out of the reach of the Chicoms, with a powerful Indian navy, then you cant think of your grand strategic plans. Thats just non sense.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,474
- Likes
- 1,061
India should forget Sri Lanka's China and Pakistan bogeys
Since India's vote supporting the resolution against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that called for promotion of reconciliation and accountability for alleged violations of International law, the predominant Delhi-centric analyses have been that India has committed an awful blunder.
The most common arguments that emerged from the conventional geo-political logic, that completely failed to see the political and public sentiments in Tamil Nadu, as well as the overwhelming evidence of alleged war crimes and human rights violations in Sri Lanka, centred around the following: India has voted against a traditional ally-neighbour and it's a strategic blunder vis-a-vis China and Pakistan.
The chatter also highlighted that the entire Asian block voted in favour while India sided with the West, and that it will further stoke Sinhala nationalism and marginalisation of Tamils.
It wasn't surprising that most of them, except a few like Kamal Mitra Chinoy, Brahma Chellany and Manoj Joshi, spoke about the issue in the same breath as they speak about Pakistan.
Sri Lankan participate in a rally in Colombo ahead of the UN resolution. AP
Very few went beyond India's geo-political loss while voting on a crucial resolution that is the first firm rap in the knuckles of a defiant country that is alleged to have killed thousands of its own Tamil citizens.
A country that is allegedly militarising and colonising Tamil majority areas to tank-roll their demography and cultural landscape so that they don't wield any influence in the country, politically or otherwise; a country that has a terrible history of silencing dissent, whether of human rights activists or journalists so much so that the activists who didn't toe the government line in Geneva are so scared to go back to Colombo.
And importantly, the resolution is coming after three years of incessant calls by international community for accountability and transparency, that too in the face of insurmountable evidence of war crimes, to which Sri Lanka's response has been chest-thumping jingoism and war-triumphalism backed by rabid Sinhala chauvinism.
Has India really lost any geo-political advantage? Constantly listening to the TV chatter coming out of Delhi, one might tend to believe so; but in reality is it so?
The two bogeys that we hear in the Sri Lankan context are China and Pakistan; that any space that we leave will be occupied by them. However, the reality is that both China and Pakistan are well-entrenched in Sri Lanka whether India gains extra legroom or not. And, it hasn't started just yesterday; but decades ago.
China's presence in Sri Lanka is not just in relation to the USD 1 billion Hambontota port or some of the roads in the north and north-east as many of us believe. They have been together since 1950s, through thick and thin, much before the disastrous Indo-China war in 1962.
In a note for the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis , RN Das writes: "the most glaring example of this is the Rubber-Rice Agreement of 1952, which has been renewed from time to time. The agreement was said to be too attractive and a boon to Sri Lanka for it not only provided a market for its surplus rubber but obtained its access to low priced food-grains so much needed."
In a maritime agreement, China had also provided a most-favoured nation treatment to the commercial vessels between itself and Sri Lanka as early as 1963. At least 45 years ahead of the so called "string-of-pearls" theory.
As of 2009, China was the biggest lender (US$ 1.2 billion) to the island with interests in airport, power-plants, roads, bridges and so on. President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited China five times during his tenure and three times before he assumed office. High level Chinese delegations too have visited Colombo on an agreement-signing spree.
The tottering Sri Lankan Airlines flies to Beijing thrice a week (with at least one Chinese-speaking crew-member), in addition to three other airlines; Chinese prostitutes are a common sight at Colombo's gambling dens and luxury hotels, and Colombo's Chinese restaurants provide more authentic Chinese dishes than one gets in India.
Sri Lanka's relationship with Pakistan might not be as much about money or the free trade agreement between them as it is about arms although Pakistan is its second largest trading parter. Pakistan has been Sri Lanka's buddy in "arms" for years. From battle-tanks to a variety of arms and ammunition, and even a Sino-Pak aircraft. Pakistan also trains Sri Lankan army-men. One can fly Colombo-Karachi in three hours or so. Not to mention the fake-DVD shops run by Pakistanis on the the city's arterial Galle Road, the salwar-clad panwallas or the dubious hangers-on.
In other words, the deep inroads of China and Pakistan to a fully willing Sri Lanka, hasn't happened in the recent past, but decades ago, with or without India. So where does India lose or gain strategically? Should India do a catch up game vis-a-vis China and Pakistan? That is what Sri lanka perhaps wants – play with the insecurity of India – which a less wily India has been innocently following.
Interestingly, both China and Pakistan have no cultural commonality with Sri Lanka, nor do they share a border. The only commonality they have, compared to India's progressive, democratic polity, is their fantastic human rights records.
Continues on the next page
India is Sri Lanka's biggest trade partner, bulk of the cargo that goes through the Colombo port is from India; in its better days the Sri Lankan Airlines survived only on Indian passengers; its petty traders in Colombo survive on baggage-goods from Chennai and it is crazy over Bollywood movies and music. Their fashion shows and celebrity glossies even import Indian models.
Sri Lanka always makes India feel that it is special. President Mahinda Rajapaksa famously said: "we are a non-aligned country. Our neighbours are Indians. I always say, Indians are our relations. From the time of Asoka, we have had that culture, but that doesn't mean we won't get commercial benefits from others; from China, or Japan, or whoever. They will come here, they will build and they will go back. India comes here, they will build and they will stay. This is the difference."
This is what India perhaps likes to believe. This is exactly the game the devious Sri Lankan regimes have been playing for years, whether it was former Presidents Premadasa or JR Jeyawardena. Premadasa even went to the extent of colluding with the LTTE to get the IPKF out of the country. What has India gained from Sri Lanka in the region's geopolitics? Will Sri Lanka ever go against China and Pakistan in a crunch situation?
Almost impossible.
Therefore, the fact of the matter is that India has nothing to lose and should not lose sight of its principles of a plural society, secularism, democracy and human rights. India cannot and should not do a China game which also includes funding African despots and Pol-Potist regimes, and fooling poor countries of their natural resources.
Instead, India should play the same game in their backyards. Afghanistan and Vietnam are the way to go. In terms of Sri Lanka, it should develop deeper channels and ports in its own territory to checkmate Colombo and Hambontota and play trade politics on commodities such as tea, rubber, garments and palm-oil.
The UNHRC vote should serve as a blessing in disguise for India. Instead of being apologetic, India should get tough with Sri Lanka in terms of accountability and reconciliation. We have played the good neighbour far too long.
The propaganda literature from Sri Lanka following the second edition of the Channel 4 documentary is a clear giveaway that Sri Lanka's design is not genuine reconciliation, but to present its majority population as magnanimous to a minority that is just 10 per cent of its population. This social engineering currently underway through militarisation and Sinhala occupation, preceded by a bloody war in which allegedly 40,000 Tamil civilians died, is what the British parliamentarians are also raising in their call on.
"The militarisation of the Tamil majority areas in the north of the island, and the curtailment of their economic, political and social rights, continues to increase tensions between already polarised communities and undermines prospects for peace."
This should be India's call as well. The international community will take care of the allegations of war crimes.
India should forget Sri Lanka's China and Pakistan bogeys | Firstpost
Since India's vote supporting the resolution against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that called for promotion of reconciliation and accountability for alleged violations of International law, the predominant Delhi-centric analyses have been that India has committed an awful blunder.
The most common arguments that emerged from the conventional geo-political logic, that completely failed to see the political and public sentiments in Tamil Nadu, as well as the overwhelming evidence of alleged war crimes and human rights violations in Sri Lanka, centred around the following: India has voted against a traditional ally-neighbour and it's a strategic blunder vis-a-vis China and Pakistan.
The chatter also highlighted that the entire Asian block voted in favour while India sided with the West, and that it will further stoke Sinhala nationalism and marginalisation of Tamils.
It wasn't surprising that most of them, except a few like Kamal Mitra Chinoy, Brahma Chellany and Manoj Joshi, spoke about the issue in the same breath as they speak about Pakistan.
Sri Lankan participate in a rally in Colombo ahead of the UN resolution. AP
Very few went beyond India's geo-political loss while voting on a crucial resolution that is the first firm rap in the knuckles of a defiant country that is alleged to have killed thousands of its own Tamil citizens.
A country that is allegedly militarising and colonising Tamil majority areas to tank-roll their demography and cultural landscape so that they don't wield any influence in the country, politically or otherwise; a country that has a terrible history of silencing dissent, whether of human rights activists or journalists so much so that the activists who didn't toe the government line in Geneva are so scared to go back to Colombo.
And importantly, the resolution is coming after three years of incessant calls by international community for accountability and transparency, that too in the face of insurmountable evidence of war crimes, to which Sri Lanka's response has been chest-thumping jingoism and war-triumphalism backed by rabid Sinhala chauvinism.
Has India really lost any geo-political advantage? Constantly listening to the TV chatter coming out of Delhi, one might tend to believe so; but in reality is it so?
The two bogeys that we hear in the Sri Lankan context are China and Pakistan; that any space that we leave will be occupied by them. However, the reality is that both China and Pakistan are well-entrenched in Sri Lanka whether India gains extra legroom or not. And, it hasn't started just yesterday; but decades ago.
China's presence in Sri Lanka is not just in relation to the USD 1 billion Hambontota port or some of the roads in the north and north-east as many of us believe. They have been together since 1950s, through thick and thin, much before the disastrous Indo-China war in 1962.
In a note for the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis , RN Das writes: "the most glaring example of this is the Rubber-Rice Agreement of 1952, which has been renewed from time to time. The agreement was said to be too attractive and a boon to Sri Lanka for it not only provided a market for its surplus rubber but obtained its access to low priced food-grains so much needed."
In a maritime agreement, China had also provided a most-favoured nation treatment to the commercial vessels between itself and Sri Lanka as early as 1963. At least 45 years ahead of the so called "string-of-pearls" theory.
As of 2009, China was the biggest lender (US$ 1.2 billion) to the island with interests in airport, power-plants, roads, bridges and so on. President Mahinda Rajapaksa visited China five times during his tenure and three times before he assumed office. High level Chinese delegations too have visited Colombo on an agreement-signing spree.
The tottering Sri Lankan Airlines flies to Beijing thrice a week (with at least one Chinese-speaking crew-member), in addition to three other airlines; Chinese prostitutes are a common sight at Colombo's gambling dens and luxury hotels, and Colombo's Chinese restaurants provide more authentic Chinese dishes than one gets in India.
Sri Lanka's relationship with Pakistan might not be as much about money or the free trade agreement between them as it is about arms although Pakistan is its second largest trading parter. Pakistan has been Sri Lanka's buddy in "arms" for years. From battle-tanks to a variety of arms and ammunition, and even a Sino-Pak aircraft. Pakistan also trains Sri Lankan army-men. One can fly Colombo-Karachi in three hours or so. Not to mention the fake-DVD shops run by Pakistanis on the the city's arterial Galle Road, the salwar-clad panwallas or the dubious hangers-on.
In other words, the deep inroads of China and Pakistan to a fully willing Sri Lanka, hasn't happened in the recent past, but decades ago, with or without India. So where does India lose or gain strategically? Should India do a catch up game vis-a-vis China and Pakistan? That is what Sri lanka perhaps wants – play with the insecurity of India – which a less wily India has been innocently following.
Interestingly, both China and Pakistan have no cultural commonality with Sri Lanka, nor do they share a border. The only commonality they have, compared to India's progressive, democratic polity, is their fantastic human rights records.
Continues on the next page
India is Sri Lanka's biggest trade partner, bulk of the cargo that goes through the Colombo port is from India; in its better days the Sri Lankan Airlines survived only on Indian passengers; its petty traders in Colombo survive on baggage-goods from Chennai and it is crazy over Bollywood movies and music. Their fashion shows and celebrity glossies even import Indian models.
Sri Lanka always makes India feel that it is special. President Mahinda Rajapaksa famously said: "we are a non-aligned country. Our neighbours are Indians. I always say, Indians are our relations. From the time of Asoka, we have had that culture, but that doesn't mean we won't get commercial benefits from others; from China, or Japan, or whoever. They will come here, they will build and they will go back. India comes here, they will build and they will stay. This is the difference."
This is what India perhaps likes to believe. This is exactly the game the devious Sri Lankan regimes have been playing for years, whether it was former Presidents Premadasa or JR Jeyawardena. Premadasa even went to the extent of colluding with the LTTE to get the IPKF out of the country. What has India gained from Sri Lanka in the region's geopolitics? Will Sri Lanka ever go against China and Pakistan in a crunch situation?
Almost impossible.
Therefore, the fact of the matter is that India has nothing to lose and should not lose sight of its principles of a plural society, secularism, democracy and human rights. India cannot and should not do a China game which also includes funding African despots and Pol-Potist regimes, and fooling poor countries of their natural resources.
Instead, India should play the same game in their backyards. Afghanistan and Vietnam are the way to go. In terms of Sri Lanka, it should develop deeper channels and ports in its own territory to checkmate Colombo and Hambontota and play trade politics on commodities such as tea, rubber, garments and palm-oil.
The UNHRC vote should serve as a blessing in disguise for India. Instead of being apologetic, India should get tough with Sri Lanka in terms of accountability and reconciliation. We have played the good neighbour far too long.
The propaganda literature from Sri Lanka following the second edition of the Channel 4 documentary is a clear giveaway that Sri Lanka's design is not genuine reconciliation, but to present its majority population as magnanimous to a minority that is just 10 per cent of its population. This social engineering currently underway through militarisation and Sinhala occupation, preceded by a bloody war in which allegedly 40,000 Tamil civilians died, is what the British parliamentarians are also raising in their call on.
"The militarisation of the Tamil majority areas in the north of the island, and the curtailment of their economic, political and social rights, continues to increase tensions between already polarised communities and undermines prospects for peace."
This should be India's call as well. The international community will take care of the allegations of war crimes.
India should forget Sri Lanka's China and Pakistan bogeys | Firstpost
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
A welcome change from the utterly biased, wool in the eyes analysis from the gaumata belt analysts.
This one line , from the previous article says it all..
This one line , from the previous article says it all..
It's time we took out the sticks...and believe me we have the sticks...its only the balls to brandish the sticks that is lacking or that have shrunk after a certain lady died.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
A comic relief...I literally split up on reading this comment by a reader :
A simple solution for this whole huge problem. Field Congress party from Colombo. All minorities can live a luxurious life at the cost of Sinhalese.
Yet another comment from another article by a gaumata belt analyst,
Very immature artical. Congress knew if it's not going to vote for the UN resolution then it will wiped off from TN though it's already to an extend. It was true that people of TN did not vote in 2009 LS election based on the SL tamil war., but after the videos that has come out of the war atrocities by SL army and it has struck people that thye have made mistake. It reflected in the 2011 TN assembly election. If Karuna did not push the govt this time then the very existance of the DMK would have come under big question. People felt cheated by Karuna when the proof of war crimes have surfaced.
The SL navy is killing the TN fishermen and India does not have the spine to question that what diplomacy are we talking here?? This arises a question that, for India, friendship with SL is important more than it's own people is the people of TN not part of India??
I can understand that whole India can not take the same position as the TN people on SL tamil issue but I hope atleast they respect that. It's really hurting to see that many people comments with out even knowing the history of the conflict. Any one who speaks for SL tamils are painted as LTTE.
When India can vote aganist Iran and Sriya but not SL? what are we talking here?
We must belive ourselves as strong nation and start commanding respect rather than by scracthing SL back. If we are scared of SL then there need not exist a country called India.
The article is immature and shows his ignorance of his own people. Grow up!
A simple solution for this whole huge problem. Field Congress party from Colombo. All minorities can live a luxurious life at the cost of Sinhalese.
Yet another comment from another article by a gaumata belt analyst,
Very immature artical. Congress knew if it's not going to vote for the UN resolution then it will wiped off from TN though it's already to an extend. It was true that people of TN did not vote in 2009 LS election based on the SL tamil war., but after the videos that has come out of the war atrocities by SL army and it has struck people that thye have made mistake. It reflected in the 2011 TN assembly election. If Karuna did not push the govt this time then the very existance of the DMK would have come under big question. People felt cheated by Karuna when the proof of war crimes have surfaced.
The SL navy is killing the TN fishermen and India does not have the spine to question that what diplomacy are we talking here?? This arises a question that, for India, friendship with SL is important more than it's own people is the people of TN not part of India??
I can understand that whole India can not take the same position as the TN people on SL tamil issue but I hope atleast they respect that. It's really hurting to see that many people comments with out even knowing the history of the conflict. Any one who speaks for SL tamils are painted as LTTE.
When India can vote aganist Iran and Sriya but not SL? what are we talking here?
We must belive ourselves as strong nation and start commanding respect rather than by scracthing SL back. If we are scared of SL then there need not exist a country called India.
The article is immature and shows his ignorance of his own people. Grow up!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2011
- Messages
- 3,496
- Likes
- 6,518
What India did was something that could have been avoided. Every sane person knows that UN is largely the puppet of the US and major EU powers. If we really had any good intentions, we would have interfered after the war, engaged with both the Tamils and non-Tamils and ironed out an acceptable ending. Something which might not have pleased all, but would have served the greater national interest of maintaining friendly relations with SL. As the regional powerhouse, that should have been the ideal thing to do.
However, it is our misfortune and bad judgement that we left everything in the hands of incompetent Congress and its puppet MMS and everything collapsed into shambles. Is it worth endangering our friendship with SL just to please Uncle Sam?
However, it is our misfortune and bad judgement that we left everything in the hands of incompetent Congress and its puppet MMS and everything collapsed into shambles. Is it worth endangering our friendship with SL just to please Uncle Sam?
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
Friendship with SL ..? We have been trying to be friends for too long with out any success. Perhaps its time to show what being hostile to India is, especially when you are tiny island about 1/50 th India's size. Why not start demanding respect rather than beg for it ?
And India's decision was not to please Uncle Sam but in line with the wishes of its own Tamil population....
Last edited:
prakashbioc
Regular Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 109
- Likes
- 40
Yes, congress usually runs for parliamentary seats and worry about elections. but the same congress idiotically supported your government, provided logistics (heat-seeking radars, two coast guard ships) and financial assistance to commit the genocide.
at least this time, congress done a meager thing under great pressure from TN (not by politicians)
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2010
- Messages
- 8,005
- Likes
- 5,758
There it comes..the Sinhala treachery and ungratefulness even though it was New Delhi that introduced a crucial amendment which effectively has made the resolution redundant... Illiterate buffoons..cant they atleast read the resolution in detail before spouting bull shit.
'India is a loser', says Sri Lankan media - India - DNA
'India is a loser', says Sri Lankan media - India - DNA
LurkerBaba
Super Mod
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2010
- Messages
- 7,882
- Likes
- 8,125
Thread closed. Please follow the topic here: http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/foreign-relations/33509-india-votes-against-sri-lanka-unhrc.html
- Status
