Chief of Defence Staff General Sarath Fonseka's recent visit to the US and his 'tactical withdrawal' to Sri Lanka together with increased speculation that he was to enter politics have been the talk of many a town.

The General's visit to the US, according to the Government, was an official one. But when the US withdrew its invitation to him to attend a military event, the visit was no longer official.

Time was running out for him to visit the US and renew his Green Card, the residency visa, which is a precursor to citizenship in that country. Ignoring the hint of trouble when the invitation for the military event was withdrawn, and still having to visit the US to renew his Green Card would have been a matter of concern to General Fonseka.

The distinction between official visits and private visits is such a thin line for Sri Lankan leaders. They have almost perfected the fine art of 'mixing business with pleasure', or in other words, having the State or the people pay for what are essentially private or pleasure trips.

There was a time when we kept badgering a former President asking her why no formal announcements were made before she left on her many foreign visits. The answer we got was that for "security reasons", such information could not be given beforehand. Then we asked if these were official visits or private trips, and we were often told that many of those jaunts were "semi-official visits". What that was supposed to mean, only the President and officials would know.

In many advanced democracies - like the United States - those who travel at public expense cannot get away so lightly. Legislators in particular have to make their travel expenses available for public scrutiny. They have to say who is picking the tab even of their hotel bills when they are on foreign tours. In Britain recently, MPs were forced to pay back money they had illegally spent from the public purse for what were strictly private matters.

Many observers believe the General is fuelling speculation that he will enter politics. The jam he got into when he visited the US and was requested to present himself for a 'voluntary interview' with the US Department of Homeland Security which wanted him to be a "source" for information on Sri Lanka's Defence Secretary on possible 'war crimes' allegations makes the General's visit, which was otherwise private, an official matter for public comment.

The JVP has made a moot point on the entire issue. It says that for as long as President Mahinda Rajapaksa's brothers, Basil and Gotabhaya, two of his closest lieutenants remain US citizens, the US will continue to intimidate Sri Lanka with issues instigated by the Diaspora of former Sri Lankans living in that country. They are being likened to the Cuban exiles who continued to exert pressure on successive US Governments against the Castro regime.

That decision of course, is entirely a personal choice of the Rajapaksa brothers, and those Sri Lankan leaders who have dual citizenship in other countries. But there is the nagging question as to whether Sri Lanka's sovereignty and national interests can be compromised by allowing foreign citizens who have pledged an oath to defend and protect their foster countries to be used as 'leverages' against their country of birth. There is now the fear that the US Tax Department will be unleashed for further 'leverage' purposes.

Increasingly, Sri Lankan politicians on either side of the political divide have one foot here and the other in some other country. The Opposition has several of its front-liners with their immediate families abroad running two homes all year round. As our Political Editor says the US has already written to some asking if they are interested in pursuing their citizenship and at least one of them has already taken steps to re-consider his citizenship status in the US.

Notwithstanding all this, is the question as to what signals are sent to the ordinary citizen when its political leaders have only one foot in their native land, and their families are sent abroad to further their nests. Questions have been justifiably raised whether it is even proper for people who have dual-citizenship to sit in Cabinet - or hope to sit in a future Cabinet and to decide on the state policy of one nation. One day, the concept of national sovereignty may be a thing of the past; but that day is not today, yet.

The US has for years used Sri Lanka as a soft target (unlike a puppet state) to test its 'leverage' in world political dynamics. Historically, too, when Sri Lanka nationalized the American oil companies back in the 1960s, the US imposed sanctions on Sri Lanka, but did not do so for other countries. It also cut off foreign aid under the Hickenlooper Amendment to the Foreign Aid laws. When we entered into a Rice-Rubber Pact with China, Sri Lanka was sanctioned under the Trading with the Enemy Act for violating Korean War sanctions on China.

What is significant in 2009 is that the US is not imposing sanctions on Sri Lanka but dealing with its own citizens and residents and thereby trying to 'leverage' Sri Lanka. This time, the US tried a fast one when it wanted to question the Chief of Defence Staff during his visit. The US does not seem to understand cricketing parlance, but it may be useful for it to acquaint itself with the saying 'they tried some under-arm tactics'; or that 'it's simply not cricket' to try and get the serving Chief of Defence Staff to rat against his boss under the guise of some benefit that has accrued to him in the form of citizenship and residency.

There was no doubt, excitement in Colombo as the General was whisked back home before he would either 'spill the beans' or turn State Witness - or so that was the impression created by asking him to return home, pronto. On the other hand, he could have pleaded the US Fifth Amendment right not to self-incriminate himself, but he has to do that under oath. He was a willing accomplice in returning home without being questioned.

One would have liked to see the General face the questions and ask what he has done differently to all the Generals, Defence Secretaries and the Commanders-in-chief of the US Armed Forces of recent times, and to invoke the 'All are equal before the law' principles of natural justice. Clearly, neither the Sri Lankan Government nor General Fonseka was willing to take a chance - and that is because of this anchor of US citizenship and residency weighing them down heavily with conflicts of interest.