How the US administration succeeded in killing two birds with one stone?
That the Sri Lankan government saw it sufficient response for its concerns shows that it is prepared to close the issue. Probably, the government thought of other issues that she has to settle with the U.S. The acceptance of the partial explanation then also means that the Mahinda Rajapaksa govt. does not want to go into affairs that took place before that time; or even hold U.S. responsible for making reference to the period before 2006. A ‘divisive’ strategy From the point of diplomatic analysis, it is clear that the U.S. has cleverly adopted a ‘divisive’ strategy in this case to get over the Secretary of State’s over-enthusiasm to defame Sri Lanka. The local political culture is such that over the rape allegation issue the present government will not only find it embarrassing to question the clarification; but also may not want to clean up someone else’s cobwebs. That [partial] clarification itself could be a feather in the cap of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the former Human Rights
