Who says Sri Lanka has gone off the international media radar after the internal conflict ended in May?
Consider this string of events in the past 10 days:
- The IMF to ascertain whether a Vote-on-Account instead of a budget would have an impact on the $2.6 billion standby credit facility to Sri Lanka, with the second tranche due any moment now
- Dozens of Sri Lankan would-be asylum seekers land on the shores of Indonesia and Canada demanding a safe haven
- The European Council is presented a final report on an investigation into Sri Lanka’s request for GSP Plus tax free concessions. The report says the government has failed to implement three key international conventions, casting doubts as to whether an extension of the facility will be approved
- The US State Department releases a report from its Office on War Crimes Issues which criticizes the government and the LTTE for human rights violations during the conflict, and demands an inquiry
- On Thursday, the European Parliament is presented a resolution asking the government to allow displaced people to return to their camps, stop repression of the media and to implement key constitutional amendments.
Sri Lanka continues to hog the headlines for the wrong reasons at a time when the searchlight should be on post-war development, economic growth and, in particular, strengthening the tourism sector – which has got bogged down over a ‘tagline’ issue.
The souring of relations between Sri Lanka and the west over human rights issues mostly relating to the last few weeks of the conflict, and poor, diplomatic handling of the GSP Plus saga in addition to other economic and trade-related issues has put Sri Lanka on the back-foot.
The President and ministers like Prof G.L. Peiris repeatedly make ‘strong’ statements of not bowing down to the West on demands for a probe into allegations of human rights abuses. Yet -- like it or not -- the West is a key trading partner, and in this context much, much bigger than other countries – including new-found friends of the Rajapaksa regime like India, China, Iran, Libya or Vietnam. An independent analysis published in this newspaper two weeks back on Sri Lanka’s trade with the rest of the world clearly shows the need to be cautious in offending our main trading partners. Countries like the US, a major garment buyer, have a trade balance totally in favour of Sri Lanka because of large garment sales unlike China for example where Sri Lanka is in debt and will remain so for many years.
Over the years, foreign policy and the way it is tackled has been anything but satisfactory. While Sri Lanka must not cow down to any country whatever the provocation, the fact remains that in the trade and investment arena there is a lot of give and take.
Take the GSP Plus trade benefits for example. The requests for conformity to the international conventions is something Sri Lanka had agreed and not implemented. So how can one argue that the EU is unfair in its demands? There was a clear roadmap for implementation under the earlier GSP Plus programme, just like a bank loan where the repayments must be made or the rest of the loan is withheld. Tax free imports is a choice of those countries and it’s a take-or-leave it policy.
Sri Lanka cannot make demands when handouts are given and without tactfully dealing with these issues, the authorities are taking on some ‘angry’ nations in the hope that the rest of the world will pity our situation. Ultimately if the concessions are stopped, it’s the workers who suffer; not the politicians.
Sri Lanka needs the tax benefits otherwise the government has to cough out millions of rupees in subsidies that has been promised to overseas buyers in case the GSP request is rejected. Arguing the case in a different context to press home the point that diplomacy and reality must overide political decisions over economic ones, the fact remains that across the world it’s consumers who drive governments to decide on import policies.
That’s something our politicians don’t understand, are reluctant to believe or simple chose to ignore for their own survival; not in the national (workers) interest.
Tea and garments are good examples of how consumers are, apart from being quality conscious, concerned about the environment and worker safeguards. The garment industry’s ‘Garments without Guilt’ which profiles how workers are treated decently and taken care of, while in tea, fair trade where a share of the profits go to worker-run welfare societies, are examples of how markets have been shaping over the years.
Forget GSP Plus, Sri Lankan exporters can lose markets if products are not in line with consumer needs: It’s not only quality and price that matter any more. When Sri Lanka entered the GSP Plus programme many years back, the private sector was actively involved in the negotiations and its successful conclusion.
Today it’s the politicians and diplomats, who don’t have a clue about an economic fallout, who are the frontline negotiators. It’s not too late to rope in our corporate chiefs, some of whom are much more savvy in reflecting the government’s ‘position’ together with the economic reality with tact and diplomacy than others now in the fray, in a damage-control exercise with the EU. If the private sector is the engine of growth, why aren’t they being consulted?
Sanity must prevail over national pride and political considerations. Ultimately it’s the employers who are responsible for the workers and would be blamed for job losses, not politicians who move on, if or when they get defeated. |
E-mail