Columns

Two events during the week gave an insight into the direction of government policy taking shape amidst influences from both East and West. Ahead of his meeting with his US counterpart John Kerry in Washington, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera on Wednesday made an important speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where for the first time he gave some pointers regarding the new government’s foreign policy. On Friday Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe met a delegation from the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference — the Chinese government’s top advisory body — led by its Vice President Wang Jiarui at Temple Trees.

Close relationships
The prime minister’s remarks to the Chinese delegation were not what many might have expected from the centre-right party leader whose coalition’s election campaign was marked by some anti-China rhetoric. Wickremesinghe said that though the two countries follow different political systems, that has not prevented the political parties of Sri Lanka and the Communist Party of China (CPC) from having close relationships. “I want to make it very, very clear — that the two countries have a close relationship, and it will become closer as time goes on” the prime minister said. The UNP values its relationship with China because it was D.S. Senanayake who recognised the People’s Republic of China. It was the UNP which had the first trade relationship with China, he said (referring to the historic Rubber-Rice Pact), and that was continued by prime ministers S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike and Sirima Bandaranaike. The UNP and the SLFP both had a close relationship with China. Now both are in the government; it was a unique experience he said. “As two countries go, whatever the issues we have we will discuss with each other.”

An official who was part of the delegation, in informal conversation before the meeting started, remarked that Sri Lanka was at the centre of attention in the region. “But Sri Lanka is handling it well,” he observed, referring to the big-power rivalry. Asked about India’s growing ties with the US against the background of China’s increasing presence in the region, he indicated it was not a major worry, saying that India was a country of ‘strategic autonomy.’ He noted that Sri Lanka needed investment for development, and for that purpose it was China that had the money.

Friendship towards all
This meeting came against the backdrop of conflicting government statements on the fate of the controversial Chinese-funded Port City project. Given its huge scale and its unusual character involving reclamation of land from the sea, environmentalists and concerned citizens are understandably up in arms.  The sale of land to the Chinese in this strategic location presents further problems. The new government’s handling of this single issue looks set to become a litmus test of its ability to protect the national interest, balancing diplomatic imperatives with domestic priorities. The matter is complicated by suspected corruption and, in all likelihood, contractual obligations inherited from the previous regime.

Meanwhile in Washington at the Carnegie institute, Minister Samaraweera struck the right note it seemed in making an appeal to the international community to ‘be patient’ with Sri Lanka in its efforts in the area of reconciliation. He kept the focus on the LLRC recommendations and the possibility of a South Africa- supported truth-seeking mechanism ‘suitable for our circumstances.’ He said Sri Lanka would ‘engage with the international community in this process including the United Nations’ and the OHCHR.  Samaraweera used the term ‘international community’ at times as if it were synonymous with ‘the West.’ But he balanced an expression of hope for reviving relations with the western hemisphere, with the assertion that Sri Lanka pursued a foreign policy based on “friendship towards all and enmity towards none”.

Why not Non-Aligned
He gave context to the features of this policy by locating them on a continuum both historically (‘dating back thousands of years, the people of Sri Lanka have always been outward looking’) and geographically (holding a significant position in maritime history, located midway between east and west). He said “Ours will be a pragmatic foreign policy not based on ideology but on the needs of our people.” The minister made only a tangential reference to the Non Aligned Movement.

It remains a puzzle as to why the new government has not unequivocally identified Sri Lanka’s foreign policy as being Non-Aligned. Nor has it identified with groupings like BRICS (emerging economic powers) or the Group of 77 (developing countries) which represent natural allies for a country belonging to the Global South.

In remarks ahead of his meeting with Samaraweera, it came as a surprise that the US Secretary of State referred to the talks as being about “how to move Sri Lanka away from 30 years of war with the Tamils…”  Sri Lanka’s war was against a separatist-fascist enemy, not with the Tamil people. It was the FBI that described the LTTE as one of world’s deadliest terrorist organizations. Was it just a slip-up or are we to understand that the US adopted the LTTE’s narrative of the war?

A flashpoint
Many recent developments underscore the reality that Sri Lanka is fast becoming a flashpoint of international contestation in the Indian Ocean region. From this perspective, the strategic value of Trincomalee with its prized natural harbour comes sharply into focus. The western powers’ eager entry into relations with the new Sri Lankan government, their partiality towards Tamil political formations, the tussle between the TNA and SLMC for control over the Eastern Provincial Council, the Northern Provincial Council’s preposterous ‘genocide’ resolution seeking UN intervention and ICC prosecution (ironically coming at a time when the government has made a clear commitment to ethnic harmony and reconciliation), India’s push to get the Sampur power project off the ground — all these separate events may arguably be seen to have some relation to the new regional strategic equation that is developing.

Against this background the Government’s Janus-like approach for foreign policy would seem to be a matter of necessity rather than choice.  The complex challenges ahead also point to why President Sirisena needs to retain some meaningful powers as president in any reformed constitution, to lend some stability to future governments as well.