By Col R Hariharan
Sri Lanka parliament voted to end the two-term limit imposed on the president by more than the required two thirds majority in the 225-member house on September 8. With the passing the 18th amendment of the constitution, the parliament has removed the constitutional bar and paved the way for President Mahinda Rajapaksa to get elected president a third term.
The ruling United Peoples Front Alliance (UPFA) with 144 seats was short of two thirds majority required to push through the constitutional amendment. Despite this, thanks to the President’s adroit advance political manoeuvres, the amendment had a smooth passage with 161 members voting in favour, and only 17 voting against.
The voting pattern showed deep divisions within opposition ranks in handling the relentless onslaught of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s political juggernaut. The opposition members appear to feel helpless; a remark attributed to one of the members aptly described it: “what to do, he will be in power for the next 12 years”.
The main opposition party - the United National Party (UNP) – wracked by internal dissension boycotted the debate as well as the voting on the bill. Instead, it chose to demonstrate outside the parliament. It had to suffer the ignominy of seeing six of its members cross voting in favour of the bill. In the wake of the voting, the UNP-led opposition coalition is in tatters as four smaller constituent parties switched their loyalty to Rajapaksa. The after shock has left UNP left in disarray with 28 out of 43 MPs members raising the flag of dissent against Ranil Wickremesinghe’s party leadership.
Even before the bill came up in parliament, the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) parted with the UNP alliance and announced its eight members would vote for the 18th amendment. Even the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) rank was depleted when its lone Sinhala member C.H. Piyasena voted for the bill.
The executive president enjoys enormous powers under the 1978 constitution. He can dissolve the parliament and declare emergency. In a state of emergency, the president can even promulgate regulations to override laws enacted by the parliament. Sri Lanka has had long spells of emergency. The state of emergency continues to be in force even now though the war ended in May 2009. He also appoints judges, heads of armed forces and police, election commissioners and secretaries to the government etc.
Both the opposition parties and the civil society had been demanding the curbing president’s powers by amending the constitution for quite sometime now. President Rajapaksa appears to have used their desire to his advantage with the18th amendment. The opposition parties and civil society have expressed serious concern over not only its form and content of the amendment but the unseemly haste with which it was being pushed through without adequate public debate.
In particular, they are concerned with two aspects of the amendment - the lifting of the two-term restriction on the president and the discarding of the 17th amendment to the Constitution. This amendment was adopted in 2001 to ensure some form of control over President’s powers in making appointments to high office.
The lifting of restriction on the number of presidential terms will provide enough time for President Rajapaksa to consolidate his power. Not only that, it could usher in dynastic rule of Rajapaksas. This is nothing unusual in South Asia; dynasties have been in power not only in the past in Sri Lanka, but also in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. But after years of internal conflict, Sri Lanka is passing through a delicate stage as the process of reconciliation and reconstruction of its democratic structure is not yet complete. At this stage the enormous powers Rajapaksa enjoys, coupled with 16 years in office (if he gets elected even once more), could neutralise the checks and balances so essential for democracy.
The removal of the 17th amendment has done away with the Constitutional Council (CC) created under of the constitution. It was mandatory for the president to act on CC’s recommendations on appointments to high office. Though partisan politics of Sri Lanka had ensured the 17th amendment was never followed both in letter and spirit, the president was obliged to follow it. As per the new amendment, the CC has been replaced by a five-member council consisting of the prime minister, speaker, leader of the opposition and a member of parliament each to be nominated by the prime minister and the leader of the opposition. This makes it purely political in character unlike the CC which provided for participation of eminent persons outside the political spectrum.
However, the catch is the president is only required only to seek the observations of the members of this parliamentary council while appointing the chairmen and members of election commission, public service commission, national police commission, human rights commission, permanent commission to investigate allegations of corruption and bribery, finance commission and delimitation commission. The president similarly consults the Council while appointing the chief justice and judges of the Supreme Court, the president and judges of the court of appeal, and members of judicial service commission other than chairman.
Almost all opposition leaders have condemned the adoption of the18th amendment saying it will lead to tyranny and dictatorship. The leader of the opposition Sarath Fonseka’s comment that the government was inviting revolutions and coups against it by creating a constitutional dictatorship through the introduction of the 18th Amendment was curious. Did have the example of rise and fall of President Fujimori of Peru in his mind?
Alberto Fujimori served as President of Peru for three terms from 1990 to 2000. During his controversial rule he eliminated the left wing Shining Path guerrillas and restored the economic stability of the country. Despite allegations of his authoritarian methods and human rights violations, he was enormously popular. In April 1995, at the height of his popularity, Fujimori was re-elected with almost two-thirds of the vote.
Though the constitution allowed only two terms for a president, he successfully contested for a third term after his party voted a law in parliament to allow him to contest. However, when a huge corruption scandal erupted, he fled to Japan in 2000. He lived in exile for five years; when he visited Chile in 2005 he was extradited to face criminal charges in Peru. He was convicted in a number of cases of bribery and corruption and human rights violations during his rule. He was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment in connection with human rights violations when death squads of the government had carried out killings and kidnappings on his orders. While the example of Fujimori looks far fetched in the context of Sri Lanka, it is a grim reminder of how public adulation can turn change when unfettered power is misused.
What does it mean to India?
Strictly speaking, the constitutional changes in Sri Lanka are an internal structural rearrangement. However, the growing power of President Rajapaksa and the likelihood of its further consolidation during a decade and a half makes are of special interest to India. President Rajapaksa is firmly in saddle and as the opposition is weak and divided than ever before, his assertive style of governance is unlikely to change in his coming term. He would also have sufficient time and freedom to plan his foreign policy on the long term to achieve his ends. This luxury is not available to the Indian Prime Minister; so India will have to evolve at least the firm contours of its Sri Lanka policy for the long term. This becomes important as China’s foot prints in South Asia and Indian Ocean region are growing.
It also makes it imperative for India to structure its security relations with Sri Lanka on a firm footing and build India-Sri Lanka trade relations by removing India's non tariff obstructions stifling the growth of free trade with Sri Lanka.
With the President calling the shots, the political package for Tamils will come only as and when he decides. He seems to be in no hurry to do this. Apparently India is not happy with this as evident from the remark of Indian Foreign Secretary for External Affairs Ms Nirupama Rao during her visit to Sri Lanka in the first week of September. She said: “He [Rajapaksa] has constantly said that he is focused on that [political solution] need. And that he plans to move on it. He has his sight set on that. And this point about the need to be more than just focused on the economic issues and the development issues and to look beyond. Everybody in the government got a sense of how we look at it. From that point of view, I think they know how India is approaching or looking at this issue.” This issue is likely to become crucial when the election fever sets in Tamil Nadu. Presumably, the issue is to be discussed when SM Krishna, India’s external affairs minister visits Sri Lanka in October.
The United States has condemned the passing of the constitutional amendment saying it undermined democracy; reactions of other western powers are also likely to be the same. So Sri Lanka can expect a renewed spell of international confrontation on allegations over human rights violations and war crimes. Frustration on this count is manifest in the statements of Sri Lanka minister of external affairs as Sri Lanka does not want to change its stand against international accountability on allegations of human rights violations.
So Sri Lanka is likely to need India’s support in international forums more than ever before. With the continuing economic downturn in the West, Sri Lanka would also need more Indian economic assistance, investment and aid for economic growth apart from funds for reconstruction of infrastructure and rehabilitation. So New Delhi will have to work out a well rounded a strategy to handle the enormous clout of President Rajapaksa to its advantage.
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group, September 11, 2010
URL: http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cnotes7%5Cnote601.html
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Deabte on Negotiation Strategies
Col R Hariharan will be participating as a panelist in a debate being broadcast by Chennai Live 104.8 FM, Chennai’s only English radio station on Monday, September 6, 2010. Other details are given below:
Time: From 8.30 AM to 10.00 AM
Topic of debate: Is Negotiation With Naxals, Terrorists & Hijackers A Sign Of Weakness Or Discretion?
Moderator: Mr Sanjay Pinto of NDTV
Listeners are welcome to send their comments.
Time: From 8.30 AM to 10.00 AM
Topic of debate: Is Negotiation With Naxals, Terrorists & Hijackers A Sign Of Weakness Or Discretion?
Moderator: Mr Sanjay Pinto of NDTV
Listeners are welcome to send their comments.
My Army Life 1977-2006
I Love the Indian Army – but I must leave Now!
I stumbled into the Indian Army in the late seventies. The School which admitted us mid-session, when we returned from Singapore, where my father had a brief teaching stint at the Singapore University, was The Army Public School, Dhaula Kuan. With teenage sons of Army officers as friends, it was natural to apply to join the National Defence Academy. A friend filled my form and even paid the application fee. I wasn’t serious at all of pursuing a career in the military – much like Hrithik Roshan in Lakshya. I saw a movie with my friends, after each of the four NDA entrance papers, and argued with my father when he questioned me on my lack of commitment to the exam.
Surprisingly, I qualified on the Service Selection Board standing 19th in the Army all India merit list. I then chose to join the National Defence Academy, as a career was assured at such an early age.
Astonishingly, within a few days of joining the NDA, at pristine Khadakwasala, I began my life long affection and admiration for the Indian Army. The NDA was awesome and I took to it as if the place was always meant for me. It was, and probably still is, a remarkable institution where everything works like clockwork, and boys transform into enthusiastic, self confident young men with fire in their belly and an idealistic vision to contribute meaningfully to the security challenges that India would face in the future.
Three years later at the Indian Military Academy in Dehra Dun, I learnt that toughness and fitness was not just about well developed physical abilities, but also as much about mental strength, and that the IMA motto of ‘Service before Self’ was not some Gandhian mumbo-jumbo, but the very edifice of life in uniform as an officer.
The many years in my Infantry battalion were even more memorable. Not a day was spent as “work”. Every day was enjoyable with a huge family of 800 men; the love, respect and camaraderie was astonishing especially in this day and age. A life of great honesty of purpose; lived simply and with great pride, respect and honour.
I had a tour of duty in Kashmir in every rank I have held. As a Lieutenant in Baramulla before the militancy, as a Captain in the Siachen Glacier at 20,000 feet, as a Major and company commander in Kupwara fighting terrorists, and as Lt Col as second-in-command of my unit in Badgam in a counter insurgency deployment on the outskirts of the Srinagar airport. Finally as a Colonel and Battalion commander, I had three different innings in the Kashmir Valley, first as part of the offensive plans during OP PARAKRAM in 2001, then fighting militants in Anantnag during the 2002 Amarnath Yatra and during the state elections, and finally on the Line of Control in high altitude in the majestic Gurez Valley.
Interspersed between these challenging times was an opportunity to serve with the United Nations in Iraq-Kuwait as a Military Observer where I saw closely officers from 34 different nations from around the globe and learnt from them about their militaries and the relationship between the State and the soldier in other countries.
I also had instructional assignments at the Indian Military Academy, Dehra Dun and at the Infantry School teaching young infantry officers. I then had an enriching year at the Army War College at Mhow during the Higher Command course in 2004-5, learning the art of higher command in the military and traveling to every corner of the country, expanding knowledge, visiting not just our various military headquarters, but also the citadels of economic power of our nation.
After the one year sabbatical at Mhow, I moved, in Apr 2005 to a dream job, to the seat of power of the Army in Delhi – the Army Headquarters with an office in South Block and an appointment in the personnel Branch of the Army dealing with postings and promotions of officers of our Army.
After three years at Delhi, a Brigadiers rank was round the corner in mid 2008. The sixth Pay commission too was promising salaries to meet with the aspirations of soldiers and government officials who had been made to feel like poor cousins to their corporate friends in the galloping India of the 21st century.
In spite of such a bright future, I felt I must I leave the Indian Army.
The three years in the nation’s capital left me with a strange emptiness which refused to go away. All the years, I felt that the many years I spent away from my immediate family, in remote corners of India, were for a cause which was noble and worthwhile. I always felt huge pride for my soldiers and brother officers. I felt there is a grateful nation behind all of us stationed so far away, battling the vagaries of weather and the uncertainty of life.
I remember in SIACHEN, in 1988, just before we started our deployment on the main Glacier, the shy 17 year old soldier, no more than a kid, who met me, then the Adjutant, and requested me to be posted to the transport platoon after this tenure, as he was very fond of motor vehicles. Four days later, he was violently taken ill at KUMAR our Headquarters at 16000 feet. We tended to him the whole night, as the helicopter could come to rescue him away only in the morning. Sadly, the High Altitude Pulmonary Odema which afflicted him was faster. He was dead before the copter arrived at the crack of dawn. It was a sad loss so soon after our induction on to the Glacier, but we took it on our chin as the accepted dangers of a soldier’s life. We shed not a tear, and proceeded to do our duty for the next six months, battling the odds and the enemy, in incredibly difficult conditions.
I recall when a soldier, who had slipped and fallen towards the enemy side was rescued at Bana top, at 20,000 feet by a brave and courageous officer who went across single handedly at grave risk to his life, to get him back. The soldier spent four hours exposed to temperatures of below minus 40 degrees C, (later both his arms were amputated). When I met him in the hospital a month later he said he knew that his company commander would come to rescue him. It taught me a lesson in trust, faith, camaraderie and leadership which I shall never forget for the rest of my life.
I also recall the young soldier who bravely jumped into a building, unrelentingly chasing three dreaded terrorists who had hidden there. We were on the outskirts of Srinagar airfield and fighting a fierce gun battle through the cold winter night in Dec 2000. He killed two of them but in the process was hit by a bullet through the head. He died in my arms. What was even more poignant was the gesture by his father when we honoured him on our battalions Raising day, the following year. In an age where money means everything, the old man broken by his young son’s loss, refused the money we as a unit of 800 had collected as a gesture of our sympathy and concern. He said he had no need for the money and the unit could put it to better use by honouring his brave son in any appropriate way.
What I observed over these three years at Delhi, unfortunately have been a sad revelation of the nature of the relationship between the Indian soldier, the State and the people of India. Like RK Laxmans common man, I have observed silently the ignorance and apathy of the establishment towards all issues military.
As our expectations from our cricket team, we expect the very best from our military in critical moments of our history, like the 71 War or the Kargil conflict.
If we were to build our home, we shall obviously get the best builders and architects we can afford, if our mother was taken ill, we would look for the very best hospital and doctor that we can afford. The critical question is; do we do enough as a nation to ensure that we have the best military India can afford?
Are we as a nation doing enough to ensure that we have the best men and systems in place to guard our sovereignty and security interests? Do we do enough to recruit and retain the brightest men and do we have the structures in place to meet the security challenges within and across our borders in the coming years?
For a start, the inability to put in place an integrated Chief of Defence Staff is the foremost of our weaknesses and is symptomatic of the apathy and ignorance of military matters in modern India. It is often dismissed as a peripheral issue, one that can wait till the services themselves resolve it. The hard truth is that without true integration of the Army, the Air Force and the Navy, a modern military will be grossly inept and incapable of prosecuting a modern day war. To use the cricketing analogy a bit further, the Kargil war was T 20 cricket and can hide a few fatal flaws, but a full scale war will be like a Test match, only synergy; balance, close integration and team spirit will ensure success.
You cannot blame the Defence Secretary or the civilian staff in the Ministry of Defence for the lack of awareness of these issues – very often the Defence Secretary would not have a days experience in the ministry till he joins as the head of the Ministry of Defence. He may have arrived from the commerce, railways or whichever ministry, the senior most bureaucrat is available at that time. The Defence Minister too often has no experience on defence matters till he becomes the Defence Minister. It is like appointing a CEO in a telecom company who had spent all his life in the cement industry!
We cannot quite expect them to understand the vital need for integration of the Services. As a comparison to our system, the United States has a long tradition of appointing secretaries of Defence and Presidents who have spent years soldiering or they choose from retired Generals with vision and an impeccable record of service for these assignments. In fact, even in India it would be inconceivable for the Foreign Secretary to be appointed from amongst the bureaucrats in say the coal ministry, so this assumption that the defence ministry can be managed by amateurs is an insult and an affront to the security needs of India.
To cite another example, we have no clearly enunciated and documented national counter-terrorism policy. In a nation where the threat of terrorism looms larger with every passing day, it is a matter of shame that we haven’t formulated one yet. With the best minds in the Army, with years of experience in counter terrorism retiring every year, it is a pity we have failed to capitalize on their experience and set out a clearly laid out document. The alarming growth of the Maoists in the Red Corridor, will test the ability of the Indian state to respond to this challenge in the coming years. Policing being a State subject and internal threats being the concerns of the Home Ministry, there is an urgent need to look at counter terrorism holistically outside the confines of individual perceptions of States and various ministries. We must radically alter the narrow confines of each ministry when we define the policy for internal threats. There is apparently a visible lack of statesmanship and professionalism on any macro issue concerning national security.
An oblique pointer to India’s concerns on national security and how embedded the military leader is in the psyche of the educated Indian is the representation at various Leadership summits and conclaves. The ‘who is who’ of India and other countries are invariable present. There will be national political figures, corporate leaders, media barons, and of course movie moughals. So while we have the likes of Aiswarya Rai and Sharukh Khan telling us their take on leadership – the practising military leader, whether a senior General or the young Major who is an Ashok Chakra winner – shining examples of leadership in its many hues – are conspicuous by their absence.
From our fiercely independent and vibrant media, one would have expected greater maturity in their coverage of security affairs. It is revealing that a study in the USA suggests that the gradual erosion of coverage of international issues by their media networks was possibly a reason for their flawed international security interventions as the American public was not capable or knowledgeable enough to question their leadership. The Indian media must ask itself – do they exhibit enough concern on the larger dimensions of national security and do they have enough knowledge of military affairs to fulfill their role as the watchdogs of the nation? Will the increasing trivialization and localization of news affect our security?
There are many such concerns that we must address as a military, as a society and as a nation. There are individual and collective responsibilities that we must fulfill. Will India and Indians meet the challenge of the future? Time, and the collective will of the nation, will tell.
Posted on August 29, 2010 by gopalkarunakaran
[Reproduced from another blog]
I stumbled into the Indian Army in the late seventies. The School which admitted us mid-session, when we returned from Singapore, where my father had a brief teaching stint at the Singapore University, was The Army Public School, Dhaula Kuan. With teenage sons of Army officers as friends, it was natural to apply to join the National Defence Academy. A friend filled my form and even paid the application fee. I wasn’t serious at all of pursuing a career in the military – much like Hrithik Roshan in Lakshya. I saw a movie with my friends, after each of the four NDA entrance papers, and argued with my father when he questioned me on my lack of commitment to the exam.
Surprisingly, I qualified on the Service Selection Board standing 19th in the Army all India merit list. I then chose to join the National Defence Academy, as a career was assured at such an early age.
Astonishingly, within a few days of joining the NDA, at pristine Khadakwasala, I began my life long affection and admiration for the Indian Army. The NDA was awesome and I took to it as if the place was always meant for me. It was, and probably still is, a remarkable institution where everything works like clockwork, and boys transform into enthusiastic, self confident young men with fire in their belly and an idealistic vision to contribute meaningfully to the security challenges that India would face in the future.
Three years later at the Indian Military Academy in Dehra Dun, I learnt that toughness and fitness was not just about well developed physical abilities, but also as much about mental strength, and that the IMA motto of ‘Service before Self’ was not some Gandhian mumbo-jumbo, but the very edifice of life in uniform as an officer.
The many years in my Infantry battalion were even more memorable. Not a day was spent as “work”. Every day was enjoyable with a huge family of 800 men; the love, respect and camaraderie was astonishing especially in this day and age. A life of great honesty of purpose; lived simply and with great pride, respect and honour.
I had a tour of duty in Kashmir in every rank I have held. As a Lieutenant in Baramulla before the militancy, as a Captain in the Siachen Glacier at 20,000 feet, as a Major and company commander in Kupwara fighting terrorists, and as Lt Col as second-in-command of my unit in Badgam in a counter insurgency deployment on the outskirts of the Srinagar airport. Finally as a Colonel and Battalion commander, I had three different innings in the Kashmir Valley, first as part of the offensive plans during OP PARAKRAM in 2001, then fighting militants in Anantnag during the 2002 Amarnath Yatra and during the state elections, and finally on the Line of Control in high altitude in the majestic Gurez Valley.
Interspersed between these challenging times was an opportunity to serve with the United Nations in Iraq-Kuwait as a Military Observer where I saw closely officers from 34 different nations from around the globe and learnt from them about their militaries and the relationship between the State and the soldier in other countries.
I also had instructional assignments at the Indian Military Academy, Dehra Dun and at the Infantry School teaching young infantry officers. I then had an enriching year at the Army War College at Mhow during the Higher Command course in 2004-5, learning the art of higher command in the military and traveling to every corner of the country, expanding knowledge, visiting not just our various military headquarters, but also the citadels of economic power of our nation.
After the one year sabbatical at Mhow, I moved, in Apr 2005 to a dream job, to the seat of power of the Army in Delhi – the Army Headquarters with an office in South Block and an appointment in the personnel Branch of the Army dealing with postings and promotions of officers of our Army.
After three years at Delhi, a Brigadiers rank was round the corner in mid 2008. The sixth Pay commission too was promising salaries to meet with the aspirations of soldiers and government officials who had been made to feel like poor cousins to their corporate friends in the galloping India of the 21st century.
In spite of such a bright future, I felt I must I leave the Indian Army.
The three years in the nation’s capital left me with a strange emptiness which refused to go away. All the years, I felt that the many years I spent away from my immediate family, in remote corners of India, were for a cause which was noble and worthwhile. I always felt huge pride for my soldiers and brother officers. I felt there is a grateful nation behind all of us stationed so far away, battling the vagaries of weather and the uncertainty of life.
I remember in SIACHEN, in 1988, just before we started our deployment on the main Glacier, the shy 17 year old soldier, no more than a kid, who met me, then the Adjutant, and requested me to be posted to the transport platoon after this tenure, as he was very fond of motor vehicles. Four days later, he was violently taken ill at KUMAR our Headquarters at 16000 feet. We tended to him the whole night, as the helicopter could come to rescue him away only in the morning. Sadly, the High Altitude Pulmonary Odema which afflicted him was faster. He was dead before the copter arrived at the crack of dawn. It was a sad loss so soon after our induction on to the Glacier, but we took it on our chin as the accepted dangers of a soldier’s life. We shed not a tear, and proceeded to do our duty for the next six months, battling the odds and the enemy, in incredibly difficult conditions.
I recall when a soldier, who had slipped and fallen towards the enemy side was rescued at Bana top, at 20,000 feet by a brave and courageous officer who went across single handedly at grave risk to his life, to get him back. The soldier spent four hours exposed to temperatures of below minus 40 degrees C, (later both his arms were amputated). When I met him in the hospital a month later he said he knew that his company commander would come to rescue him. It taught me a lesson in trust, faith, camaraderie and leadership which I shall never forget for the rest of my life.
I also recall the young soldier who bravely jumped into a building, unrelentingly chasing three dreaded terrorists who had hidden there. We were on the outskirts of Srinagar airfield and fighting a fierce gun battle through the cold winter night in Dec 2000. He killed two of them but in the process was hit by a bullet through the head. He died in my arms. What was even more poignant was the gesture by his father when we honoured him on our battalions Raising day, the following year. In an age where money means everything, the old man broken by his young son’s loss, refused the money we as a unit of 800 had collected as a gesture of our sympathy and concern. He said he had no need for the money and the unit could put it to better use by honouring his brave son in any appropriate way.
What I observed over these three years at Delhi, unfortunately have been a sad revelation of the nature of the relationship between the Indian soldier, the State and the people of India. Like RK Laxmans common man, I have observed silently the ignorance and apathy of the establishment towards all issues military.
As our expectations from our cricket team, we expect the very best from our military in critical moments of our history, like the 71 War or the Kargil conflict.
If we were to build our home, we shall obviously get the best builders and architects we can afford, if our mother was taken ill, we would look for the very best hospital and doctor that we can afford. The critical question is; do we do enough as a nation to ensure that we have the best military India can afford?
Are we as a nation doing enough to ensure that we have the best men and systems in place to guard our sovereignty and security interests? Do we do enough to recruit and retain the brightest men and do we have the structures in place to meet the security challenges within and across our borders in the coming years?
For a start, the inability to put in place an integrated Chief of Defence Staff is the foremost of our weaknesses and is symptomatic of the apathy and ignorance of military matters in modern India. It is often dismissed as a peripheral issue, one that can wait till the services themselves resolve it. The hard truth is that without true integration of the Army, the Air Force and the Navy, a modern military will be grossly inept and incapable of prosecuting a modern day war. To use the cricketing analogy a bit further, the Kargil war was T 20 cricket and can hide a few fatal flaws, but a full scale war will be like a Test match, only synergy; balance, close integration and team spirit will ensure success.
You cannot blame the Defence Secretary or the civilian staff in the Ministry of Defence for the lack of awareness of these issues – very often the Defence Secretary would not have a days experience in the ministry till he joins as the head of the Ministry of Defence. He may have arrived from the commerce, railways or whichever ministry, the senior most bureaucrat is available at that time. The Defence Minister too often has no experience on defence matters till he becomes the Defence Minister. It is like appointing a CEO in a telecom company who had spent all his life in the cement industry!
We cannot quite expect them to understand the vital need for integration of the Services. As a comparison to our system, the United States has a long tradition of appointing secretaries of Defence and Presidents who have spent years soldiering or they choose from retired Generals with vision and an impeccable record of service for these assignments. In fact, even in India it would be inconceivable for the Foreign Secretary to be appointed from amongst the bureaucrats in say the coal ministry, so this assumption that the defence ministry can be managed by amateurs is an insult and an affront to the security needs of India.
To cite another example, we have no clearly enunciated and documented national counter-terrorism policy. In a nation where the threat of terrorism looms larger with every passing day, it is a matter of shame that we haven’t formulated one yet. With the best minds in the Army, with years of experience in counter terrorism retiring every year, it is a pity we have failed to capitalize on their experience and set out a clearly laid out document. The alarming growth of the Maoists in the Red Corridor, will test the ability of the Indian state to respond to this challenge in the coming years. Policing being a State subject and internal threats being the concerns of the Home Ministry, there is an urgent need to look at counter terrorism holistically outside the confines of individual perceptions of States and various ministries. We must radically alter the narrow confines of each ministry when we define the policy for internal threats. There is apparently a visible lack of statesmanship and professionalism on any macro issue concerning national security.
An oblique pointer to India’s concerns on national security and how embedded the military leader is in the psyche of the educated Indian is the representation at various Leadership summits and conclaves. The ‘who is who’ of India and other countries are invariable present. There will be national political figures, corporate leaders, media barons, and of course movie moughals. So while we have the likes of Aiswarya Rai and Sharukh Khan telling us their take on leadership – the practising military leader, whether a senior General or the young Major who is an Ashok Chakra winner – shining examples of leadership in its many hues – are conspicuous by their absence.
From our fiercely independent and vibrant media, one would have expected greater maturity in their coverage of security affairs. It is revealing that a study in the USA suggests that the gradual erosion of coverage of international issues by their media networks was possibly a reason for their flawed international security interventions as the American public was not capable or knowledgeable enough to question their leadership. The Indian media must ask itself – do they exhibit enough concern on the larger dimensions of national security and do they have enough knowledge of military affairs to fulfill their role as the watchdogs of the nation? Will the increasing trivialization and localization of news affect our security?
There are many such concerns that we must address as a military, as a society and as a nation. There are individual and collective responsibilities that we must fulfill. Will India and Indians meet the challenge of the future? Time, and the collective will of the nation, will tell.
Posted on August 29, 2010 by gopalkarunakaran
[Reproduced from another blog]
Learning from Wikileaks
By Col R Hariharan
To those weary of reading all about the Wikileaks -the publication of 92,000 secret military intelligence documents relating to the U.S. war against the Al Qaeda in Afghanistan on the net – I can assure this article is not to ‘advise’ Americans how to conduct the war. This is about what we in India can learn from the leaks relating two key areas – governance and intelligence operations.
Wikileaks has brought about the stark reality of modern environment of war and peace which coexist in nations fighting terrorism and insurgency. Compromise of military operational secrets also questions government policy decisions and applications as President Barack Obama is finding out now. In democracies it is elected members who critically analyse government actions in parliament. But Wikileaks has enlarged arena of debate to public domain where everyman will be questioning the government based on the information from Wikileaks. Such public debates are healthy no doubt; but they could also make governments overcautious to in taking timely decisions. At times it could drive them to the point of inaction.
Wikileaks’ insights on the relationship between governance and conduct of war are revealing. Governance relates to a whole gamut of issues extending from policy prescriptions, to logistics and inept decision making as much as poor generalship and conduct of operations of armed forces.
Wikileaks is not the first large scale leakage of classified papers. The ‘Pentagon Papers’ during the Vietnam War compromised by Daniel Ellsberg who worked for Rand Corporation was another classic case of similar proportions. But the scale and scope of Wikileaks is unprecedented. In fact Wikileaks will be releasing 12,000 more documents relating to Afghan war. Nor Wikileaks will be the last. The reason is simple: the era of right to information and whistle blowers is here to stay. As this is the era of copy cats, we can soon expect our own Indian edition of Wikileaks. So is the government gearing up for such possibility? I have my reservations as our lumbering style of governance has its own method of stymieing any new ideas. And if there is a ‘Delhileak’ of massive proportions there would not be enough fig leaves for the government to hide behind.
And suppressing such leaks is not going to be easy. It may also be politically not prudent to take action under the Official Secrets Act against a whistleblower. Whistleblowers have become modern day Davids fighting the Goliath of mindless governments. Ideally the only way make them inactive is for the rulers to clean up their acts. And that is not going to be easy as ultimately such dirty jobs fall on the laps of bureaucracy. So bureaucracy is likely to end up with this unviable job without supportive policy decisions. This could mean cosy days of bureaucracy taking a snooze and leave the decision making to committees (or in our case groups of ministers) are (hopefully) coming to a close.
Even before Wikileaks hit the headlines, New Delhi has been in a tizzy as our TV channels have frequently displayed documents ‘leaked to them’ on a number of inconvenient issues. Undoubtedly whistleblowers have been doing a splendid job to keep the public informed of the misdeeds of power brokers. The underground ‘political’ response to whistleblowers has resulted in the growing number of unnatural deaths among them. So far the long arm of law had been showing studied reluctance to act even in cases where the identity of the whistleblower was compromised at the highest level. There had been increasing public outrage at this.
Deferring to public opinion, the Union Cabinet has recently given the go ahead for the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making Disclosure Bill 2010 to be introduced in parliament. The Bill provides the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) the powers of a civil court to enable it to penalise people revealing the identity of whistleblowers. The onus will be on the CVC to protect the identity of citizens who provide information about the misuse of governmental authority and funds. But can the CVC act boldly under the new enactment in the inner sanctums of South or North Block?
As an old MI hand, with the advent of electronic age I find age-old problems of intelligence have morphed into gigantic proportions. With the click of a mouse, Wikileaks has compromised a colossal number of secret documents. Traditionally the enemy eavesdrops on secrets of state by infiltrating an agent to access the secrets. The revolution in electronics and communication has made this job much easier. The agent or source need not be near the operational area any more to unravel the secrets. He could do the same job from another country where he can access the server or elsewhere if the work is farmed out offshore.
Ideally to overcome this problem, the vetting process of those employed on sensitive jobs will have to be constantly upgraded to keep pace with advances in technology. But these are unlikely to stop whistleblowers acting according to their conscience. The FBI has already arrested Bradley Manning, 22-year old IT professional who was horrified at the atrocities committed on Afghan war, for suspected involvement in the leaks. Regardless of merits of the issue, what can security administrator in war or peace do about such whistleblowers? Very little, as our democracy is more condescending to the perpetrator as long as he does not wear a uniform. With individual freedom gaining more space than national interest, and the media vying for exclusive news breaks plugging such leaks will not be easy. This is evident from the follow up on Wikileaks.
Wikileaks has also done a great disservice to intelligence community by giving out the particulars of agents and sources who had been working for law enforcing agencies, government, and armed forces. What will happen to them now as their cover is blown? Who will save them from terror threats to their lives and property? These are open ended questions that must be bothering the American intelligence agencies on the ground in Afghanistan. But it is time we also found answers to these questions as our security enforcement systems are loose and criminal nexus with extremism is rampant. The job of intelligence gatherers is going to be much more difficult. Probably a healthy mix of technology tools and human intelligence would emerge as the answer to problems of intelligence gathering.
At times intelligence agencies carry out double cross operations converting the agent caught in the act to work for them. At the height of Cold War, the British SIS and CIA successfully mounted - Berlin Tunnel - a major operation to tap the underground cable lines between East Berlin to Moscow by digging a tunnel. However, when the KGP came to know of it, it decided to turn it into its favour by deception. Soviets sent a lot of dummy traffic that kept the SIS-CIA sleuths in a wasteful exercise of translating thousands of transcripts, while KGB honchos were tickled to death. Such deception operations to reduce the compromise of sources and information through leaks of the Wikileaks could be the answer. But that is totally a different ball game.
To those weary of reading all about the Wikileaks -the publication of 92,000 secret military intelligence documents relating to the U.S. war against the Al Qaeda in Afghanistan on the net – I can assure this article is not to ‘advise’ Americans how to conduct the war. This is about what we in India can learn from the leaks relating two key areas – governance and intelligence operations.
Wikileaks has brought about the stark reality of modern environment of war and peace which coexist in nations fighting terrorism and insurgency. Compromise of military operational secrets also questions government policy decisions and applications as President Barack Obama is finding out now. In democracies it is elected members who critically analyse government actions in parliament. But Wikileaks has enlarged arena of debate to public domain where everyman will be questioning the government based on the information from Wikileaks. Such public debates are healthy no doubt; but they could also make governments overcautious to in taking timely decisions. At times it could drive them to the point of inaction.
Wikileaks’ insights on the relationship between governance and conduct of war are revealing. Governance relates to a whole gamut of issues extending from policy prescriptions, to logistics and inept decision making as much as poor generalship and conduct of operations of armed forces.
Wikileaks is not the first large scale leakage of classified papers. The ‘Pentagon Papers’ during the Vietnam War compromised by Daniel Ellsberg who worked for Rand Corporation was another classic case of similar proportions. But the scale and scope of Wikileaks is unprecedented. In fact Wikileaks will be releasing 12,000 more documents relating to Afghan war. Nor Wikileaks will be the last. The reason is simple: the era of right to information and whistle blowers is here to stay. As this is the era of copy cats, we can soon expect our own Indian edition of Wikileaks. So is the government gearing up for such possibility? I have my reservations as our lumbering style of governance has its own method of stymieing any new ideas. And if there is a ‘Delhileak’ of massive proportions there would not be enough fig leaves for the government to hide behind.
And suppressing such leaks is not going to be easy. It may also be politically not prudent to take action under the Official Secrets Act against a whistleblower. Whistleblowers have become modern day Davids fighting the Goliath of mindless governments. Ideally the only way make them inactive is for the rulers to clean up their acts. And that is not going to be easy as ultimately such dirty jobs fall on the laps of bureaucracy. So bureaucracy is likely to end up with this unviable job without supportive policy decisions. This could mean cosy days of bureaucracy taking a snooze and leave the decision making to committees (or in our case groups of ministers) are (hopefully) coming to a close.
Even before Wikileaks hit the headlines, New Delhi has been in a tizzy as our TV channels have frequently displayed documents ‘leaked to them’ on a number of inconvenient issues. Undoubtedly whistleblowers have been doing a splendid job to keep the public informed of the misdeeds of power brokers. The underground ‘political’ response to whistleblowers has resulted in the growing number of unnatural deaths among them. So far the long arm of law had been showing studied reluctance to act even in cases where the identity of the whistleblower was compromised at the highest level. There had been increasing public outrage at this.
Deferring to public opinion, the Union Cabinet has recently given the go ahead for the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making Disclosure Bill 2010 to be introduced in parliament. The Bill provides the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) the powers of a civil court to enable it to penalise people revealing the identity of whistleblowers. The onus will be on the CVC to protect the identity of citizens who provide information about the misuse of governmental authority and funds. But can the CVC act boldly under the new enactment in the inner sanctums of South or North Block?
As an old MI hand, with the advent of electronic age I find age-old problems of intelligence have morphed into gigantic proportions. With the click of a mouse, Wikileaks has compromised a colossal number of secret documents. Traditionally the enemy eavesdrops on secrets of state by infiltrating an agent to access the secrets. The revolution in electronics and communication has made this job much easier. The agent or source need not be near the operational area any more to unravel the secrets. He could do the same job from another country where he can access the server or elsewhere if the work is farmed out offshore.
Ideally to overcome this problem, the vetting process of those employed on sensitive jobs will have to be constantly upgraded to keep pace with advances in technology. But these are unlikely to stop whistleblowers acting according to their conscience. The FBI has already arrested Bradley Manning, 22-year old IT professional who was horrified at the atrocities committed on Afghan war, for suspected involvement in the leaks. Regardless of merits of the issue, what can security administrator in war or peace do about such whistleblowers? Very little, as our democracy is more condescending to the perpetrator as long as he does not wear a uniform. With individual freedom gaining more space than national interest, and the media vying for exclusive news breaks plugging such leaks will not be easy. This is evident from the follow up on Wikileaks.
Wikileaks has also done a great disservice to intelligence community by giving out the particulars of agents and sources who had been working for law enforcing agencies, government, and armed forces. What will happen to them now as their cover is blown? Who will save them from terror threats to their lives and property? These are open ended questions that must be bothering the American intelligence agencies on the ground in Afghanistan. But it is time we also found answers to these questions as our security enforcement systems are loose and criminal nexus with extremism is rampant. The job of intelligence gatherers is going to be much more difficult. Probably a healthy mix of technology tools and human intelligence would emerge as the answer to problems of intelligence gathering.
At times intelligence agencies carry out double cross operations converting the agent caught in the act to work for them. At the height of Cold War, the British SIS and CIA successfully mounted - Berlin Tunnel - a major operation to tap the underground cable lines between East Berlin to Moscow by digging a tunnel. However, when the KGP came to know of it, it decided to turn it into its favour by deception. Soviets sent a lot of dummy traffic that kept the SIS-CIA sleuths in a wasteful exercise of translating thousands of transcripts, while KGB honchos were tickled to death. Such deception operations to reduce the compromise of sources and information through leaks of the Wikileaks could be the answer. But that is totally a different ball game.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Sri Lanka Perspectives - August 2010
By Col R Hariharan
Constitutional amendments
The Rajapaksa government is set to carry out the much awaited amendments to the 1978 Constitution. The Supreme Court is to give its comments on the proposed amendments and the parliament is scheduled to discuss them on September 8.
The need for constitutional amendments, particularly with a view to exercise some form of parliamentary oversight on the executive presidency, had figured as a major issue in almost all elections. President Rajapaksa had been sounding leaders of most of the political parties including the opposition United National Party (UNP) on this issue ever since he was elected for a second term. However, till now he had not been able to push through the amendments as the ruling United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), with 144 seats, fell short of two thirds majority support in the 225-member house.
However, towards the end of August, the president managed to win over the support of the opposition Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) which has 8-members in parliament. The surprise U-turn of the SLMC, which had been opposing President Rajapaksa all along, shows the declining fortunes of political opposition. The proposed amendments are likely to be passed in parliament with the committed support of 154 members in the first week of September.
The proportional representation system of voting makes it difficult for any political party or alliance to gain two thirds majority in the house Thus the amendment of the constitution will be a politically significant achievement for President Rajapaksa. One of the proposed amendments allows the election of the president for third term in office; this will enable President Rajapaksa a chance to be elected a third term. Thus consolidation of the president’s political power now appears to be almost complete.
Under the 1978 constitution, the President enjoys enormous powers including the unilateral dissolution of parliament and declaration of emergency. He also has powers to appoint judges, heads of armed forces and police, election commissioners and secretaries to the government etc. In a state of emergency, the President can even promulgate emergency regulations to override laws enacted by the parliament. Sri Lanka has a long history of emergency since 1970 mainly triggered by war against Tamil separatists. Even though the war ended in May 2009, the emergency continues to be in force. This has caused concern to civil society organisations both at home and abroad.
In a bid to ensure some form of control over President’s powers to make appointments to high office, the parliament adopted the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001. This makes it mandatory for the president to act on the recommendations of a 10-member Constitutional Council (CC) while making appointments. However, so far there had been no attempt to enforce the 17th Amendment in letter and spirit. One of the amendments proposed now, aims at replacing the CC with a five-member Constitutional Advisory Committee (CAC). The name of the proposed amendment would suggest the advisory rather than mandatory nature of its role. This could defeat the fundamental purpose of the 17th Amendment.
Sri Lanka’s credibility has suffered over allegations of humanitarian and human rights excesses both during the war, particularly in its last lap. Given this background its reputation as a democracy now depends entirely upon how President Rajapaksa handles enormous powers vested in him in the next decade and a half, assuming he is elected for a third term.
Court martial of General Sarath Fonseka
The process of downsizing of the political image of former Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka made significant progress when an army court martial found him guilty of engaging in politics while in service. With President’s approval, the General has been cashiered and stripped of his medals and honours.
Those who gave evidence against the General included the Cooperatives and Internal Trade Minister Johnston Fernando, UNP MP Lakshman Seneviratne, and Major General Krishantha Silva, former Military Secretary.
Fonseka is facing one more Court Martial for his alleged involvement in shady procurement deals, which also involved his son-in-law Dhanuna Tillekeratne. In addition to this, he has also been indicted for defamation over his alleged statement in The Sunday Leader accusing the Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa of ordering the army not to take prisoners during the war in Vanni.
Fonseka is the leader of the opposition Democratic National Alliance (DNA) in parliament. The main opposition parties including the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) alliance partner of the DNA, and the UNP have condemned the conviction of Fonseka, as politics of persecution. Fonseka had opposed Rajapaksa’s bid for the second term as president. Whether it is true or not, the prosecution of the national hero marks the low ebb of politics in the country.
India raises its sights on Sri Lanka
As Tamil Nadu is gearing up for legislative elections, both the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK) and its national ally the Congress Party have focused on Indian aid to Sri Lanka for the Tamils affected in the war torn Northern Province. The issue had figured in interaction between leaders of both parties at the highest level. And Tamil Nadu chief minister Karunanidhi expressing concern at the proper utilisation of the Indian aid had requested the prime minister for despatching a representative to make a first hand assessment.
Towards the end of the month, the Indian government despatched Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao on a visit to Vavuniya, Kilinochchi, and Jaffna areas for a first hand assessment of Indian assistance to the affected population. She met a number of displaced persons awaiting resettlement as well as those already resettled. She also visited sites of de-mining operations carried out by Indian agencies.
The visit has brought sharp focus on the implementation aspects of resettlement for which Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh had announced Rs 500-crore humanitarian assistance last May. Ms Rao also focused on India’s promise to construct 50,000 houses for the displaced population made during the visit of President Rajapaksa to India in June 2010. She said the houses would be constructed with local participation to give a fillip for their employment.
Both New Delhi and Colombo took another significant step to boost bilateral relations when they signed an agreement to establish Indian consulates general in Jaffna and Hambantota. This was agreed upon during Rajapaksa’s New Delhi visit. Sri Lanka is also likely to establish yet another consulate in India, in addition to the ones now in Chennai and Mumbai.
These Indian moves are significant in the face of sustained high profile interest of China in Sri Lanka for sometime now. On August 15, the President participated int the ceremonial filling of sea water in the harbour basin of the Chinese aided Hambantota Port under construction. This marked the completion of first phase for which the Chinese had given a loan of $ 425 million. Sri Lanka is negotiating for a further $ 800 million loan for the second phase of the $ 1.5 billion dollar project. When completed Hambantota will have bunkering facility and a tank farm project with a capacity of 80,000 metric tonnes. The port will begin handling ships from November. It is one of the four ports being built or upgraded as part of Rajapaksa's plan to boost the economy. They will significantly change the strategic profile of Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean security, apart from impacting trade and commerce.
Tamil refugees in Canada
The travails of Tamil refugees seeking safety overseas were highlighted when Canada intercepted MV Sun Sea carrying over 490 Tamils heading towards Port Alberni in British Colombia. They have been detained in camps apparently for screening before deciding their future. Sri Lanka has alleged that among them were LTTE cadres escaping capture from Sri Lanka and their supporters. In a similar incident last October Canada took in 72 Tamils asylum seekers after their ship Ocean Viking was stranded without a port to berth off Indonesia. It is going to be more and more difficult for Sri Lankan Tamil refugees to find refuge as Sri Lanka is no more considered as war torn country.
August 31, 2010
Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, September 2010 Vol 4 No 8
www.security-risks.com
Constitutional amendments
The Rajapaksa government is set to carry out the much awaited amendments to the 1978 Constitution. The Supreme Court is to give its comments on the proposed amendments and the parliament is scheduled to discuss them on September 8.
The need for constitutional amendments, particularly with a view to exercise some form of parliamentary oversight on the executive presidency, had figured as a major issue in almost all elections. President Rajapaksa had been sounding leaders of most of the political parties including the opposition United National Party (UNP) on this issue ever since he was elected for a second term. However, till now he had not been able to push through the amendments as the ruling United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA), with 144 seats, fell short of two thirds majority support in the 225-member house.
However, towards the end of August, the president managed to win over the support of the opposition Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) which has 8-members in parliament. The surprise U-turn of the SLMC, which had been opposing President Rajapaksa all along, shows the declining fortunes of political opposition. The proposed amendments are likely to be passed in parliament with the committed support of 154 members in the first week of September.
The proportional representation system of voting makes it difficult for any political party or alliance to gain two thirds majority in the house Thus the amendment of the constitution will be a politically significant achievement for President Rajapaksa. One of the proposed amendments allows the election of the president for third term in office; this will enable President Rajapaksa a chance to be elected a third term. Thus consolidation of the president’s political power now appears to be almost complete.
Under the 1978 constitution, the President enjoys enormous powers including the unilateral dissolution of parliament and declaration of emergency. He also has powers to appoint judges, heads of armed forces and police, election commissioners and secretaries to the government etc. In a state of emergency, the President can even promulgate emergency regulations to override laws enacted by the parliament. Sri Lanka has a long history of emergency since 1970 mainly triggered by war against Tamil separatists. Even though the war ended in May 2009, the emergency continues to be in force. This has caused concern to civil society organisations both at home and abroad.
In a bid to ensure some form of control over President’s powers to make appointments to high office, the parliament adopted the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001. This makes it mandatory for the president to act on the recommendations of a 10-member Constitutional Council (CC) while making appointments. However, so far there had been no attempt to enforce the 17th Amendment in letter and spirit. One of the amendments proposed now, aims at replacing the CC with a five-member Constitutional Advisory Committee (CAC). The name of the proposed amendment would suggest the advisory rather than mandatory nature of its role. This could defeat the fundamental purpose of the 17th Amendment.
Sri Lanka’s credibility has suffered over allegations of humanitarian and human rights excesses both during the war, particularly in its last lap. Given this background its reputation as a democracy now depends entirely upon how President Rajapaksa handles enormous powers vested in him in the next decade and a half, assuming he is elected for a third term.
Court martial of General Sarath Fonseka
The process of downsizing of the political image of former Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka made significant progress when an army court martial found him guilty of engaging in politics while in service. With President’s approval, the General has been cashiered and stripped of his medals and honours.
Those who gave evidence against the General included the Cooperatives and Internal Trade Minister Johnston Fernando, UNP MP Lakshman Seneviratne, and Major General Krishantha Silva, former Military Secretary.
Fonseka is facing one more Court Martial for his alleged involvement in shady procurement deals, which also involved his son-in-law Dhanuna Tillekeratne. In addition to this, he has also been indicted for defamation over his alleged statement in The Sunday Leader accusing the Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa of ordering the army not to take prisoners during the war in Vanni.
Fonseka is the leader of the opposition Democratic National Alliance (DNA) in parliament. The main opposition parties including the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) alliance partner of the DNA, and the UNP have condemned the conviction of Fonseka, as politics of persecution. Fonseka had opposed Rajapaksa’s bid for the second term as president. Whether it is true or not, the prosecution of the national hero marks the low ebb of politics in the country.
India raises its sights on Sri Lanka
As Tamil Nadu is gearing up for legislative elections, both the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK) and its national ally the Congress Party have focused on Indian aid to Sri Lanka for the Tamils affected in the war torn Northern Province. The issue had figured in interaction between leaders of both parties at the highest level. And Tamil Nadu chief minister Karunanidhi expressing concern at the proper utilisation of the Indian aid had requested the prime minister for despatching a representative to make a first hand assessment.
Towards the end of the month, the Indian government despatched Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao on a visit to Vavuniya, Kilinochchi, and Jaffna areas for a first hand assessment of Indian assistance to the affected population. She met a number of displaced persons awaiting resettlement as well as those already resettled. She also visited sites of de-mining operations carried out by Indian agencies.
The visit has brought sharp focus on the implementation aspects of resettlement for which Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh had announced Rs 500-crore humanitarian assistance last May. Ms Rao also focused on India’s promise to construct 50,000 houses for the displaced population made during the visit of President Rajapaksa to India in June 2010. She said the houses would be constructed with local participation to give a fillip for their employment.
Both New Delhi and Colombo took another significant step to boost bilateral relations when they signed an agreement to establish Indian consulates general in Jaffna and Hambantota. This was agreed upon during Rajapaksa’s New Delhi visit. Sri Lanka is also likely to establish yet another consulate in India, in addition to the ones now in Chennai and Mumbai.
These Indian moves are significant in the face of sustained high profile interest of China in Sri Lanka for sometime now. On August 15, the President participated int the ceremonial filling of sea water in the harbour basin of the Chinese aided Hambantota Port under construction. This marked the completion of first phase for which the Chinese had given a loan of $ 425 million. Sri Lanka is negotiating for a further $ 800 million loan for the second phase of the $ 1.5 billion dollar project. When completed Hambantota will have bunkering facility and a tank farm project with a capacity of 80,000 metric tonnes. The port will begin handling ships from November. It is one of the four ports being built or upgraded as part of Rajapaksa's plan to boost the economy. They will significantly change the strategic profile of Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean security, apart from impacting trade and commerce.
Tamil refugees in Canada
The travails of Tamil refugees seeking safety overseas were highlighted when Canada intercepted MV Sun Sea carrying over 490 Tamils heading towards Port Alberni in British Colombia. They have been detained in camps apparently for screening before deciding their future. Sri Lanka has alleged that among them were LTTE cadres escaping capture from Sri Lanka and their supporters. In a similar incident last October Canada took in 72 Tamils asylum seekers after their ship Ocean Viking was stranded without a port to berth off Indonesia. It is going to be more and more difficult for Sri Lankan Tamil refugees to find refuge as Sri Lanka is no more considered as war torn country.
August 31, 2010
Courtesy: South Asia Security Trends, September 2010 Vol 4 No 8
www.security-risks.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)