{"id":38181,"date":"2015-02-06T00:36:55","date_gmt":"2015-02-06T05:36:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=38181"},"modified":"2015-02-06T00:36:56","modified_gmt":"2015-02-06T05:36:56","slug":"pluses-and-minuses-in-improving-bi-lateral-relations-between-india-and-sri-lanka","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/?p=38181","title":{"rendered":"Pluses and Minuses in Improving Bi-lateral Relations Between India and Sri Lanka."},"content":{"rendered":"

By<\/p>\n

N Sathiya Moorthy
\n<\/strong>
\nThe euphoria of the new leadership in Sri Lanka towards the northern Indian neighbour may have set the right tone and tenor for further betterment of bilateral relations as in regional and international contexts. The relationship had slackened, and strained up to a point, particularly in the last year of President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s 10-year regime and for specific reasons. <\/p>\n

The Indian media did not give enough space for the maiden overseas visit of Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera for most part, but that should not belittle the hosts’ new-found enthusiasm in engaging with Sri Lanka as a nation, government and peoples. <\/p>\n

That the wide-ranging talks between Samaraweera and Indian counterpart Sushma Swaraj extended over three hours should speak volumes not only for the commonality of approaches but also the complexities of the issues involved, at some stage. There were serious Indian concerns on the China (submarine-berthing) and Pakistan (ISI basing cross-border terrorism out of Sri Lanka), which the previous government in Colombo seemed to have over-looked but the present one could address squarely, in its own larger national interests. <\/p>\n

There are other issues on which both nations need to work with and on others, including existing and emerging stake-holders. Some of them are present, particularly on the Indian side by sheer default and neglect, and they – and their concerns — need to be addressed too – and nearer home. There are yet others, where the solution lies elsewhere, either closer home in Sri Lanka or in faraway global capitals and institutions, starting with the UNHRC in Geneva. These are solutions that could address the Indian concerns and silence criticism from within, particularly southern Tamil Nadu State. <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The Narendra Modi government in India inheriting all the pluses and minuses of the Sri Lanka relations from predecessor Manmohan Singh dispensation, yet could not do much about it, particularly in view of the successive speculation and reality of fresh presidential polls in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan presidential polls that followed in double-quick time and the change of leadership in that country meant that the two nations can now start off on a clean slate, so to say. The Samaraweera visit has thus laid the foundation for the two governments to move forward, on specific issues and very specifically. <\/p>\n

Tamils in key positions <\/strong><\/p>\n

As was hoped for and promised, the Sri Lankan government of President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe have begun well on the home front, particularly on the vexatious ethnic issue. It refuses to die down, despite the exit of LTTE terror, war and violence full five years back. The new government’s decision on the double-quick appointment of a civilian governor in the Northern Province is their commitment to the cause. H M G S Palihakkara, as the Northern Province Governor, brings to the task, his vast and varied diplomatic and negotiating experience as a former Foreign Secretary of the nation. <\/p>\n

Palihakkara’s appointment has since been followed coincidentally by the appointment of Justice K Sripavan, only the second Tamil Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, have all augured well. Justice Sripavan as the second senior-most Judge after controversial Chief Justice Mohan Peiris — who was replaced just for a day by predecessor, Shirani Bandanayake, whose ‘impeachment’ under predecessor President Rajapaksa — was the one who administered the oath of office to President Sirisena. A Tamil, K C Logeswaran, is also now the Governor of the Western Province, of which the capital city of Colombo is a part – and another, Arjuna Maheswaran, that of the all-important Central Bank. <\/p>\n

Having contributed hugely to President Sirisena’s election, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), heading the elected Northern Province administration since late 2013, is meaningfully awaiting the conclusion of the parliamentary polls, promised to be called by 23 April, at the end of the new government’s 100 days in office. In the presidential polls, the TNA could mobilise the Tamil voters on the single promise of President Rajapaksa’s exit. They may contest the parliamentary polls on their own, and the TNA might flag their electoral concerns\/views over military presence and UNHCR probe, and political concerns on power-devolution “within a united Sri Lanka”. <\/p>\n

India had urged President Rajapaksa to implement the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution on power-devolution in letter and spirit. Then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had facilitated it in 1987. President Rajapaksa volunteered 13-Plus, but did not move beyond the promise – or, so was it seen. The TNA too wanted 13-Plus, but of a different description. Though substantive progress was said to have been made on specifics, the talks got stalled, and aborted after a time, particularly when the nation’s collective and differential energies were dissipated in the UNHRC probe-related global politics. <\/p>\n

Months before the January 8 presidential polls, later-day Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe would declare that his United National Party (UNP) was not for going beyond 13-A. As Prime Minister later, he has said that finding a solution would not be difficult and there were already five government-commissioned reports (involving politicians as its members) over the decades that could provide answers to the TNA’s demands. The TNA had proposed the same to the previous government, but to no avail. <\/p>\n

Be it as it may, a lot on the passage of constitutional amendments required for the purpose would depend on the composition of the post-poll parliament and the acceptance of such proposals by individual parties – and at times individual MPs and groups belonging to larger parties. How the TNA faces up to the emerging situation, and also faces off the traditional ‘separatist groups’ within the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora, who have not given up after losing the presidential poll game to the TNA on the ‘boycott issue’, too remains to be seen. Where India could fit in, and how, is equally unclear just now. <\/p>\n

‘Accountability issues’ <\/strong><\/p>\n

There is the related linkage to the ‘accountability issues’ over ‘allegations of war crimes’, where a UNHRC probe, ordered at the instance of the US and the rest, needs to be taken to its logical or illogical conclusion, if progress had to be made on a permanent political solution to the ethnic issue. The new government in Colombo cannot be seen, particularly by Sinhala-Buddhist constituencies – hardliners or not – and also by the TNA as wanting to hunt with the hound and run with the hare. <\/p>\n

Prima facie, it’s for the new government in Sri Lanka to negotiate with the US and other prime-movers behind the UNHRC resolutions in the past three years. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, with his vast and varied experience in the job on two earlier occasions and his known proclivity towards the West and its ‘liberal’ models, has said that his government would not allow ‘external probes’ into ‘accountability issues’ but at the same time would not shy away from engaging the international community, unlike the predecessor Rajapaksa regime. <\/p>\n

The new rulers in Colombo have indicated that the previous government could have handled the situation better and engaged the international community and the UNHRC, as well. Present-day President Sirisena, during poll campaigns, had offered\/promised to defend the Rajapaksa family – and the 200,000- strong armed forces — on ‘accountability issues’. Dr Jayantha Dhanapala, a high-ranking former UN diplomat and at present Presidential Advisor, post-poll, has since concluded a series of ‘exploratory meetings’ in Geneva, ahead of the bi-annual March session of the UNHRC. <\/p>\n

India should be keenly watching the developments on this score. Having voted with the US on the UNHRC resolution twice, in 2012 and 2013, India boycotted the 2014 vote on principles, when the US draft threw its ‘sovereignty’ concerns to winds and called for an ‘international probe’. The US carried the vote at the time, but it’s unclear just now if either the US or its supporters from the previous three years would want to do it again without giving new government in Colombo enough time to take stock and return. <\/p>\n

How President Sirisena keeps up the promise, and how Prime Minister Wickemesinghe ensures that there is no one-sided global inquiry, which overlooks the LTTE’s war-crimes of decades and fails to fix ‘political responsibility’ in one case even while doing so in the case of the other, can have serious repercussions. The ruling Tamil National Alliance (TNA), ruling the Northern Province, is divided on this issue as on the larger political negotiations, with one section saying that they would not be satisfied with anything less than an international probe – thus also reflecting the views of a vociferous, ‘separatist’ section of the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora. <\/p>\n

India, under such circumstances, could be seriously impeded in taking forward its expectations of an earlier political settlement to the ethnic issue – which could encourage a free flow of war-time Sri Lankan Tamil refugees, now staying in India (and elsewhere, too. In all this India may have greater influence on the Sri Lankan Government than on the TNA, which needs to demonstrate its ‘independence’ from ‘Diaspora separatists’ more than eclipsing the latter’s ‘boycott call’ for the presidential poll. <\/p>\n

Return of the natives <\/strong><\/p>\n

Linked also to the ethnic issue, to a greater or lesser extent, is the return of the Sri Lankan Tamil refugees to their native land. In New Delhi and back home in Colombo, Minister Mangala Samaraweera invited all Sri Lankans living outside the country during the period of war to return home. At the Indian Republic Day function in the Indian Consul-General’s office in Jaffna, Northern Province Chief Minister C V Wigneswaran, representing the Tamil community and their Tamil National Alliance (TNA) party, too invited the refugees back home. <\/p>\n

A lot needs to be done by the two governments in this regard, but when and how if the efforts are to produce desired results – and nothing else – are unclear as yet. Culturally and historically, India is not in the habit of turning back ‘guests’, even if they ended up ‘ruling’ them. In the case of Sri Lankan Tamils, they continued to get Indian hospitality and care even after the LTTE’s assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. And the sympathy and support for them have only increased in recent years. There is nothing to suggest that this trend should be discontinued – or, would be discontinued. India in particular would want to be convinced that the returnees would not have an occasion to rush back to India, particularly in the absence of any economic wherewithal back home. It would be even more so in the case of the refugees, who would not want to go back home without guarantees to their earning capacity and opportunities – which are just not there back from wherever they had left, in the war-torn North and the East of the island-nation. <\/p>\n

Under the Indian constitutional scheme, the State Government in Tamil Nadu has got both rights and responsibilities towards the refugees, who add up to over 100,000 – over two-thirds of them in camps run by the State Government and funded by the Centre. State Chief Minister O Pannerselvam wrote to Prime Minister Modi as to why the State would not participate in a scheduled official meeting on refugee-repatriation at Delhi, citing ‘apprehensions’ (?) about their safety when the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) was still present in their areas. <\/p>\n

Near-simultaneously, former Union Minister and Congress member of the Rajya Sabha, the Upper House, Sudarshan Natchchiappan, heading a parliamentary advisory committee, claimed, based on studies, that over 70 percent of the refugees in Tamil Nadu camps wanted to return home. He too said that the refugees wanted safety, security and jobs with earning capacity, as and when they went back home. NGOs like OfERR, headed by S C Chandrahasan, son of the late Sri Lankan Tamil rights leader, S J V Chelvanayagam, working with the refugees in a very big way, have called for the governments concerned to facilitate their early return home, but have also indicated a long list of facilitating clauses on the ground.<\/p>\n

Chief Minister Panneerselvam’s missive to Prime Minister Modi also contains what reads like the State Government’s belated, initial reaction to the presidential polls in Sri Lanka, when he said that “recent political developments in Sri Lanka are a cause for hope and have raised expectations of reconciliation”. The Delhi consultations, in which the Sri Lankan Government too was represented, went off without a representative of the Tamil Nadu dispensation, and the expectation now is that the Chief Minister has not given up hope on political reconciliation and facilitating\/consequent down-sizing of army presence and role in the war-affected areas in that country. <\/p>\n

Yet, Tamil Nadu, the polity and the government, too need to learn – and are also encouraged thus — to work with the elected representatives of the Tamil people in a ‘neighbouring country’, and respect their views on all issues, ethnic. The elected TNA Government in the Northern Province continues to swear by a ‘negotiated political settlement within a united Sri Lanka’, but the Tamil Nadu Assembly went ahead and passed a unanimous resolution for a referendum on the future status of the Tamil areas and people in that country, with voting rights for their Diaspora. It now seems to extend to refugee-repatriation, too. As and when the chips are down, it’s inevitable that the inherent differences between the two elected ‘Tamil governments’ on the fishers’ issue could also get clearer expression. <\/p>\n

In the post-poll scenario in Sri Lanka, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) elected administration in the North in particular would want to have its say on all matters ethnic – and are as constantly consulted as is required. Chief Minister Wigneswaran has already indicated as much on the political solution, provincial administration, military presence, ‘accountability’ probe(s), and now also on refugee-rehabilitation. They need opportunities to experience and experiment with running a political administration. They also need to be given the opportunity to take ‘responsibility’ for their people and (only) ‘within a united Sri Lanka’, and not otherwise, as imagined elsewhere. The Sri Lankan Government should consider how to integrate the Northern Provincial Council (NPC) in particular into the refugee-rehabilitation process. They should also be considering similar measures for the Eastern Province.<\/p>\n

In facilitating refugee-repatriation, India – and also Sri Lanka — will also be ensuring – and\/or should ensure – that any precedent of sorts that it might set in terms of the ‘return of the natives’ is in no way used by third nations with considerable Sri Lankan Tamil refugees and\/or asylum-seekers, to turn them out. This can cause political problems for some in those host-nations. For India, after three long decades of hospitality, neither the Centre, nor the Tamil Nadu government need to feel guilty for setting off a process that had possibilities other than intended, and elsewhere. <\/p>\n

TN over-reaction <\/strong><\/p>\n

For bilateral relations to make real progress, and for India not to lose the initiative and drive of the new government in Sri Lanka, and the expected successor after parliamentary polls in that country, it needs to do its own part of the homework, quick and clear. The ‘Tamil Nadu factor’ to bilateral issues covers not only ethnic issue and the fishers’ problem, but also trade and commerce, and the very movement of Sinhala-Buddhist pilgrims and training for Sri Lankan soldiers in Indian army schools and bases in the State. <\/p>\n

Any over-reaction from across the Palk Strait, either from the Tamil Nadu Government or its ‘competitive, pan-Tamil polity’, or both, could put under a more ‘liberal’ dispensation in Colombo on the defensive even more than in the case of its predecessor. It goes beyond maintaining a stoic silence to attacks on aged pilgrims wanting to visit Bodhgaya, or on shoppers, or to protests against military training for their men in uniform. India cannot flag the ‘China issue’ beyond a point if it’s not able to even offer training for Sri Lankan soldiers in the base\/school of their government’s choice. <\/p>\n

On the fishers’ issue, no solution could be found unless the Centre is able to talk the Tamil Nadu government and through them the fishers down south, to discontinuing vessels (bottom-trawlers) and gears (nets) that are banned under law in Sri Lanka, and which unlike in India, is enforced, too. There is also the larger question of the ‘Katchchativu case’, filed by ruling AIADMK leader Jayalalithaa in the Supreme Court, which in turn is linked to the IMBL and IMBL violations. On trade, ‘double-taxation’ of the Indian kind, where the Centre and the States hurts Sri Lankan exporters, who also face non-tariff barriers of one kind or the other. Unless this is handled internally, India cannot expect cooperation from Sri Lankan businesses – hence their government – for upgrading the existing Free Trade Agreement (FTA) into a mutually even-more productive CEPA (Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement), which despite initialling by both sides has remained a dead-letter for over five years now. <\/p>\n

R-Day, first of a kind <\/strong><\/p>\n

For all this, however, bilateral relations, post-poll in Sri Lanka could not have begun better. In an unprecedented move, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe accepted High Commissioner Y K Sinha’s initiative and invitation and was the honoured chief guest at the Republic Day celebrations at the Indian High Commissioner, Colombo – possibly a first one of the kind for any Indian embassy elsewhere, too. He was accompanied by nearly 30 incumbent ministers, not to leave out former ministers and other political bigwigs, as has been the norm on such occasions. <\/p>\n

In the past, ministerial attendance was mostly sort of statutory, more for the sake of form and protocol, when designated persons would be present. There were exceptions when senior leaders, including ministers, would drop in as a matter of personal courtesy and as a display of their regard for the northern neighbour. This time round, it was a reflection of the ‘yearning’ of the new leadership to build bridges with India and for real – the kind of ‘yearning’ High Commissioner Sinha said in his address that Sri Lankans had displayed closer home for a change of leadership! <\/p>\n

(The writer is a Senior Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, Chennai Chapter)<\/em><\/p>\n

Tweet<\/a><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By N Sathiya Moorthy The euphoria of the new leadership in Sri Lanka towards the northern Indian neighbour may have set the right tone and tenor for further betterment of bilateral relations as in regional and international contexts. The relationship had slackened, and strained up to a point, particularly in the last year of President …<\/p>\n

Continue reading ‘Pluses and Minuses in Improving Bi-lateral Relations Between India and Sri Lanka.’ »<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[12],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38181"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=38181"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38181\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":38182,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38181\/revisions\/38182"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=38181"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=38181"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dbsjeyaraj.com\/dbsj\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=38181"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}