Sri Lanka Perspectives - June 2012

By Col R Hariharan

Highlights

•         Indian National Security Advisor Shiv Shankara Menon’s one-day visit triggered media speculation as it came after President Mahinda Rajapaksa met with Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh on the sidelines at the Rio+20 summit in Brazil in the third week of the month.

• Political confrontation between ruling coalition and opposition was triggered after ten goons armed with T-56 rifles, riding motorcycles carried out brazen daylight attack on a JVP meeting in Southern Sri Lanka killing two persons.

• Provincial councils of Eastern, North Central and Sabaragamuwa provinces have been dissolved preparatory to the elections to be held for them in September 2012. The election commission has called for filing of nominations from July 12 to 19; the elections will be held on a Saturday falling on 1st, 8th or 15th September 2012. Opposition parties have castigated the government for not announcing the Northern Provincial Council elections, which are long overdue.  

Sri Lanka: Flogging the Tamil Eelam issue

By Col. R. Hariharan 

May Day celebrations in Sri Lanka this year saw an unusual sight. R Sampanthan, the septuagenarian leader fighting for Sri Lanka Tamil rights and president of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), standing shoulder to shoulder with the United National Party (UNP) leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, waved a Sri Lanka flag to the cheers of a massive crowd in Jaffna celebrating the May Day. 

Indian Parliamentary delegation to Colombo- Some Observations

By Col. R. Hariharan 

(Here is my response to specific questions raised by media on the Indian parliamentary delegation’s visit to Colombo on April 16, 2016.) 

1.     Is this parliamentary delegation on a goodwill visit or fact finding mission to Colombo? 

The visit is a reciprocal visit from our parliament after a parliamentary delegation from Sri Lanka visited India. Such delegations are regularly exchanged between many countries; in fact a Sri Lanka parliamentary delegation visited Pakistan in February 2011. So the overall objective of this delegation is also presumably to increase the goodwill between Indian and Sri Lankan parliamentarians. 

Impact of UNHRC Resolution on India-Sri Lanka r

Col R Hariharan

India was among the 24 countries that voted for the U.S. draft resolution on Sri Lanka’s accountability in respect of human rights violations which was passed at the 19^th meeting of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) at Geneva. Fifteen member countries opposed it while eight abstained. The text of the resolution is at Annexure. 

By voting for the resolution, India has shown it concurs with two core issues contained in the resolution: 

1.      Sri Lanka has not adequately taken up follow up action on the LLRC’s recommendations on a host of issues. It needs “to credibly investigate widespread allegations of extra-judicial killings and enforced disappearances, demilitarize the north of Sri Lanka, implement impartial land dispute resolution mechanisms, re-evaluate detention policies, strengthen formerly independent civil institutions, reach a political settlement on the devolution of power to the provinces, promote and protect the right of freedom of expression for all and enact rule of law reforms.”

President Rajapaksa’s Moment of Truth

Col R Hariharan

President Mahinda Rajapaksa confronted his moment of truth at Geneva on February 27 when the 19^th meeting of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) started discussing Sri Lanka. It was third time Sri Lanka’s accountability issue had figured at the 47-member body. This time it is going to be difficult for Sri Lanka to ward off discussion as the U.S. has circulated a draft resolution that questions Sri Lanka’s accountability during the last days of Eelam War in May 2009.  

Sri Lanka Perspectives: February 2012

Col R Hariharan

Highlights

The 19^th meeting of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) that started at Geneva on February 27 dominated the national attention during month. The U.S drafted resolution asking Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) relating to human rights was to come up at the meeting.

Sri Lanka Perspectives: October 2011

By Col R Hariharan

Overview

In the first half of the month, the Sri Lanka scene was dominated by the final phase of the local body elections in which President Rajapaksa’s United People Freedom Alliance (UPFA) coalition scored a massive success underlining his continued popularity.

In the second half, the Commonwealth Heads of State Meeting (CHOGM) held at Perth, Australia came into the limelight as it considered the creation of a Human Rights watchdog for the Commonwealth.  Sri Lanka felt this as targeted move against the country as it continued to be in a state of denial over the alleged war crimes committed by Sri Lanka Army during the last stage of Eelam War. However, the proposal sponsored mainly by Britain, Canada and Australia was not accepted. Similarly Sri Lanka also ran the risk of losing its opportunity to host the CHOGM 2013 when Canada and the UK suggested changing the venue. However, again thanks to the support of Afro-Asian members this was also rejected.    

Sri Lanka: FAQs on Channel 4 videos on war crimes - Part 2

Transcurrents.com had carried my earlier blog on Channel 4 videsos

(http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/2202#comment-8859). It evoked large scale response from readers. While some of them were the familiar India-bashing type, one of the reader asked a few interesting questions which reflected the suspicions about India's role in Sri Lanka prevalents among sections of Sri Lankans. I chose one to answer that had the most interesting questions. I am giving below my answers to this reader  which are carried in www.transcurrents.com  under the heading "Sri Lanka did not bother to listen to international friends who helped it win the war - Col R Hariharan"

(http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/2339  for your reading. 

Since Jazz has raised some interesting questions. I am normally accustomed to abusive language, which Sri Lankans seem to be fond of while discussing India. However, as he has politely worded his questions, I am answering them:

1. Do you believe that military forces around the world conduct ‘clean’ wars? If so, please be kind enough to mention those forces. Do you honestly believe that any kind of ‘war’ can be ‘clean’ in present day context?

Sri Lanka Perspectives: June 2011

By Col R Hariharan

Sri Lanka- India relations

The recent political changes in Tamil Nadu and the stodgy attitude of Sri Lanka to increasing Indian concerns on a whole lot of issues connected with Tamil minority and the Eelam war appear to have started having its adverse impact on Sri Lanka-India ties. In a frank assessment, India’s prime minister Dr Manmohan Singh in an interaction with selected editors of Indian media vocalised India’s concerns. He acknowledged his dilemma in handling Sri Lanka Tamil issue calling the grievances of the Tamil community in Sri Lanka ‘legitimate.’ He said the Tamils felt “they are reduced to second-class citizens.” He said that within the Sri Lanka population there were hotheads, and “the Sinhala chauvinism is a reality.”

Sri Lanka Perspectives – May 2011

by Col R Hariharan

External developments

Even as Sri Lanka celebrated Victory Day for the second year on May 27, allegations of war crimes and human rights violations in the last stages of its ‘final’ war the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) continued to haunt it. Sri Lanka’s damage control actions so far do not appear to have yielded much dividend. The latest in these efforts was a 3-day international seminar “Defeating Terrorism – the Sri Lankan Experience” organised by the Sri Lanka Army at Colombo from May 31. Sri Lanka expected participation from 45 countries. This is probably an exercise to vindicate the approach it adopted to defeat terrorism to deflect the increasing international flak over war crimes allegations. 

Sri Lanka: Jayalalithaa fires the first salvo

By Col. R. Hariharan
 

After staging a spectacular victory over her bête noire M Karunanidhi-led Dravida Munnetra Kazagham(DMK) in Tamil Nadu assembly elections, Ms Jayalalithaa, leader of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (AIADMK), has called upon the Indian government for action against the Sri Lanka  President Mahinda Rajapaksa for alleged war crimes and genocide of Tamils. Speaking at her very first press conference, Ms Jayalalithaa said “The President of Sri Lanka must be tried for war crimes and brought before the International Court of Law…” The AIADMK leader added, "India can no longer remain a silent spectator….If necessary, an economic blockade will have to be resorted to bring a recalcitrant Sri Lanka to heel."

Sri Lanka: Cleaning up the act

By Col R Hariharan

The report of the three-member UN  panel of experts set up to advise UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on alleged war crimes and human rights violations committed during the final stages of the Eeelam war has produced two reactions – both on expected lines.

In the report made public by the UN on April 25, the panel found many of the allegations “credible” against both the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). This has vindicated the suspicion of all those who had been accusing Sri Lanka government of committing these crimes. This section includes many liberal governments of West, INGOs, Tamil Diaspora, human rights activists both within and outside Sri Lanka and of course the rump of the LTTE still trying to revive the defunct organisation amidst Tamil Diaspora. (One will notice that I have omitted India and Tamil Nadu where attitudes are not crystallised as the issue is inexorably mired in domestic and national politics, not unlike Sri Lanka.) However, this disparate section has neither a common agenda nor a forum for collective action; it constituents widely differ on the follow up action to be taken on the report. These range from increasing diplomatic pressure to bring it up in the UN Security Council to indicting President Mahinda Rajapaksa for war crimes.     

Sri Lanka Perspectives – April 2011

By Col R Hariharan

UN advisory panel report and its fall out

The report of the three-member UN  panel of experts, set up to advise UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on allegations of war crimes and human rights abuse during the final stages of the Eeelam war, has found credible reports of war crimes committed by both the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The report released by the UN on April 25, has made the following recommendations to the Secretary General:

a.    The Government of Sri Lanka should immediately commence “genuine investigations” into these and other alleged violations of international humanitarian and human rights law committed by both sides involved in the armed conflict.

b.    The Secretary- General should immediately establish an independent international mechanism, whose mandate should include: monitoring and assessing the extent to which Sri Lanka is carrying out domestic accountability process and investigations and advising the Secretary General on its findings; and conduct investigations independently into the alleged violations.

Sri Lanka Perspectives – December 2010

By Col R Hariharan

[I apologise for uploading this piece written on December 31, 2010 late; my academic teaching commitments at the IIM, Raipur and IIM, Indore had been keeping me busy. I am completing my  teaching commitment by next week.]

Two major issues came to the fore in Sri Lanka during the month. These were the mounting international pressure on Sri Lanka to probe allegations of war crimes and what appears to be waning commitment of the government to take speedy action to resolve the grievances of minorities. Both the issues have become foils in the fight for survival by the opposition United National Party (UNP), battered in both the presidential and parliamentary elections, and increasing political domination of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP).

War crimes allegations

International pressure on Sri Lanka to investigate allegations of Sri Lanka army’s war crimes in the last phase of the Eelam War is clearly mounting. Apart from the build up of well orchestrated campaign by sections of Tamil Diaspora there is sense of exasperation on this issue discernible particularly among the governments in many nations. Three developments during the month indicated that the issue was likely to come to the fore in the UN in the coming months.

Seventeen U.S. senators and 30 members of the House of Representatives in a letter to the Secretary of State Ms Hillary Clinton wanted the U.S. to seek a UN role in investigating the allegations of war crimes. They wrote “We strongly believe that any conclusions reached by the Sri Lankan government's commissions must be verified by a parallel international mechanism” backed by the UN. Their stand that without a means of verification, any findings “will lack credibility and true accountability,” generally reflected the view of Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora. In a separate letter, the House members urged the U.S. to use its presidency of the UN Security Council during December to push forward “a credible and effective process for achieving accountability” in Sri Lanka.

The Wikileaks on Sri Lanka which came to light also showed American concerns on the issue. In classified diplomatic cables from the U.S. embassy in Colombo, officials wrote that the Sri Lankan government showed no signs of investigating alleged human rights violations committed by its side. They also that any effort to investigate was further complicated because President Rajapaksa, his brothers and Army Commander Sarath Fonseka, were responsible for many of the alleged crimes. The U.S. administration under President Barack Obama had been urging Sri Lanka to ensure accountability and to promote reconciliation. However, it had not supported the demand for an international probe of the allegations. This stand could be tested in the coming months.

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said in a TV interview acknowledged that his country was having a difficult relationship with Sri Lanka. “We want the Government of Sri Lanka to do better on human rights, to investigate alleged abuses and war crimes in the past.” The frosty relationship between the two countries was demonstrated when the Oxford Union which had invited President Mahinda Rajapaksa to speak at the Union cancelled his engagement in the last minute, citing “security reasons.” The hugely embarrassing incident was triggered by protestors spearheaded by Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora who threatened to converge on Oxford to disrupt the meeting. The cancellation came as a rude shock to the people of Sri Lanka as it demonstrated not only Sri Lanka Tamil Diaspora’s clout in the UK, but also the British government’s “hands off attitude” shrugging off  the President’s visit as unofficial. 

Sri Lanka’s Ministry of External Affairs, caught on the wrong foot over the fiasco of the President’s visit, appeared confused when the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at his year-end press conference in New York said the panel of experts on Sri Lanka “is now able to visit Sri Lanka and meet with the Commission on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation.” He further added that this was the result of “long consultations” he held with President Rajapaksa.

All along Sri Lanka government had been opposed even the appointment of the UN panel of experts, who the Secretary General were only to advice him and not probe the allegations. The news created a furore among the hawks in the ruling United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA). In a bid to clarify the government stand on the issue, the Presidential spokesman said that all arrangements would be made “for the panel to make representations before the LLRC. This position has been conveyed through diplomatic channels to the UN, as announced by the External Affairs Ministry.”

There was further confusion when Sri Lanka media quoted UN sources to say that the UN panel had no plans to make representations to the LLRC, “but would interact with members of the LLRC on subjects that are of common interest to both.” In a follow up, the government explained that it would issue visas for the United Nations expert panel to visit Sri Lanka and meet the LLRC, when such a request was made. Media Minister Keheliya Rambuklwella said “They [the UN panel members] will not be permitted to carry out investigations, record evidence or visit places of their choice without prior government approval.” As a face saving act, efforts are said to be underway for the LLRC members and the UN panel members to meet in a foreign venue.

From this botched up episode it would appear President Rajapaksa has softened his rigid opposition to the UN panel entering Sri Lanka. However, it is unlikely to represent any change in Sri Lanka’s stand against allowing any form of international involvement relating to the war crimes issue as the President appears to enjoy strong support on this issue among the public.

Resolving minority grievances

The Oxford fiasco has hurt the national sentiments of Sri Lankans by and large. Thus it could harden President Rajapaksa’s against external interference in the country’s handling of ethnic issue. This is further strengthened by information contained in Wikileaks on INGO relief money finding its way to the LTTE in the early years of the Peace Process 2002.

There are small indications of the hardening stand. The Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapaksa has stopped construction of all new buildings in the North and East under projects planned with donor-funded loan or grant. With the reported return of Sinhalas, who were thrown out of the Northern Province by the LTTE, in large numbers to Jaffna, Tamils are complaining of preferential treatment meted out to the rehabilitation of Sinhalas, than the war affected Tamils.

In the latest intake of 135 recruits to the Sri Lanka Administrative Service there were no Tamils and just a single Muslim. Although none of the Tamil medium candidates were successful among 257 candidates who made it to the interview stage, it showed the government was not in a mood to take any special measures to increase minority representation in government service.

There was also the cabinet decision to allow the singing of Sri Lanka's national anthem only in Sinhala. As per this decision the Tamil version would no longer be played at any official or state functions as it used to be done in the North and the East, which have a large Tamil population. 

These developments are causing concern to Tamils and Muslims though they are reluctant to voice them in public. So they are likely to welcome the recent statement of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi that the Sri Lanka government was "not doing enough" for the Tamils in Sri Lanka. During a visit to Tamil Nadu he is reported to have said that he would take up the matter with "appropriate persons" at the Centre and see that Sri Lankan Tamils got justice. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M Karunanidhi had also written to the Prime Minister on the subject. He had said the presence of about 30,000 Tamils in camps for internally displaced persons in Sri Lanka was a matter of "serious concern" as resettlement and rehabilitation of the Tamils had not been fully addressed by Sri Lankan Government in spite of earnest efforts and dialogue at various levels undertaken by India. With the Congress-DMK alliance passing through difficult patch due to the 2G scam, and the Tamil Nadu state elections around the corner, New Delhi is likely to increase its pressure Sri Lanka to improve its record in the coming months.

Courtesy: www.security-risks.com

Sri Lanka Perspectives - November 2010

 By Col R Hariharan (Retd.)

POLITICAL

Swearing of the President

Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa was sworn in as President for a second term on Nov 19, 2010. In a marked departure from the austere swearing-ins of the past, this time it had all the trappings of a coronation. After the swearing-in, colourful celebrations included a military parade with a fly-past of air force jets, a special display by Navy and a cultural display.  The pompous nationwide celebrations with huge cut outs of Rajapaksa showed that orchestration of  Rajapaksa personality cult is well under way and is likely to gather momentum.

Notable foreign representatives on the occasion included Bhutanese Prime Minister Lyonchhen Jigmi Thinley, Chinese Deputy Prime Minister Sang Giuowei and Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Hu Zhengyue, and Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed. India was represented by Minister of State for External Affairs Ms Parmit Kaur. In a clear departure from past practices, the ceremony started with only Buddhist religious observance instead of multi-faith prayers. The main opposition United National Party boycotted the ceremony.

Jumbo cabinet

President Rajapaksa’s new cabinet has been shaped on the basis of constitutional amendments. DM Jayaratne was made be the Prime Minister setting aside media speculations that President’s brother Basil Rajapaksa would be the choice. Basil will now be handling  planning and development portfolio. For the first time a new category of 'senior ministers' with 11 members has been introduced. They included trusted members of his earlier team. In addition to this 61 cabinet ministers and 31 deputy ministers have also been inducted.

Thus in all 104 members out of 161 members of the President’s United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) have been included in the cabinet! He appears to have accommodated as many members as possible in the cabinet to prevent any defection from the ruling coalition. Apparently, political expedience appears to be the priority rather than efficiency of governance.

In spite of such large number of ministers, the President has retained the vital portfolios of defence, finance and planning, ports and aviation and highways under him. The senior ministers have been given other important portfolios indicating though their attendance at cabinet meetings was optional! The President’s strategy appears to be to keep coalition flock together and allow ministers and deputy ministers to perform only nominally. It indicated Rajapaksa’s lack of faith in retaining of the loyalties of the members of his coalition despite his mass popularity and lack of effective opposition.

Tamil politics

Heroes Day celebration: The deafening silence that greeted November 26, the birthday of Velupillai Prabhakaran, which used to be celebrated by the LTTE and its supporters as Maveerar Naal (Heroes Day) in Tamil areas of Sri Lanka showed the extent of disillusionment with the ideal of a separate Tamil Eelam. A former LTTE leader Athavan, now settled in Vanni, in a poignant statement issued on the occasion castigated the Tamil Diaspora for using the name of Prabhakaran and the Tamil Tigers for selfish reasons unmindful of the plight of former cadres and their families in Sri Lanka.

The Tamil Political Parties Forum (TPPF): All Tamil political parties excluding the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) have formed the TPPF to take up issues affecting Tamils in one voice. A TPPF delegation met President Rajapaksa on Nov 26 and handed over a letter expressing their concerns. The TPPF asked the President to find a political solution to the ethnic question within a united Sri Lanka so that Tamil people can fully participate in the governance in the North and East. “The implementation of the 13th amendment in full will be a positive beginning of the political process in this regard,” the TPPF said. The TNA is also said to be in informal touch with the TPPF so that they can come to a political understanding. Presumably this is in preparation of the Northern Provincial Council elections which are likely to be scheduled in March 2011.

DEFENCE

Joint exercise: Sri Lanka army, navy and air force carried out the first ever joint exercise in the last week of Nov 2010. Around 2500 armed forces personnel participated in the exercise code-named 'Cormorant Strike’ carried out along the coast in area Silawaturai, Mannar in Northern Province. According to defence sources Commando Regiment and Special Forces made amphibious landing during the exercise and participated ground operations. The objective of the exercise was to train leaders at different levels in planning, command and decision making . The selection of the Mannar coast for the regiment-group sized exercise across India’s Rameswaram coast is interesting. Probably the exercise was also to send a warning to LTTE’s international elements trying to revise the Eelam separatist movement among the Diaspora.

LTTE massacre of military prisoners: The army has opened a mass grave in Viswamadu jungle in Mullaitivu district where 26 armed forces personnel who were taken prisoner were shot dead by the LTTE were buried. The prisoners included 18 SLN sailors (including two naval officers) and eight army personnel. The naval prisoners were survivors of a LTTE Sea Tiger attack in 2007 in which Navy lost three Dvora craft. The security forces are in the process of identifying the dead. 

Army de-mining program:  The U.S. has donated US$500,000 worth of items including several vehicles, trucks, ambulances and equipment to Sri Lanka Army providing further assistance of de-mining operations underway in the North. India, Japan, Australia and the U.S. are among the countries assisting de-mining operations. While so far 856,203,415 square meters have been de-mined, parts of Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu districts still remain to be de-mined.   

FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

Hambantota port inauguration 

President Rajapaksa fresh from a visit to China, formally inaugurated the Hambantota Port on November 18. The just completed Phase-I of the Chinese assisted project was launched in January 2008. The $360 million Phase-I includes a bunker terminal. The Chinese government provided 85% of the funding while the remaining 15% was to be met by the Sri Lanka Ports Authority.  The launch of the second phase of the development of the port is said to have commenced on the same day.

Around 29 companies a majority of them Chinese are reported to have expressed interest in investing in various industries in the Hambantota Port. The Chinese companies have shown interest in manufacture and assembling of automobiles. At present Sri Lanka automobile market is dominated by India and the Chinese entry is likely to pose a stiff competition to the Indians. 

India 

Not to be outdone by China, India is also trying to increase its visibility in Sri Lanka. India’s External Affairs Minister S M Krishna paid a three day visit to Sri Lanka from November 25. He attended the 7^th India-Sri Lanka Joint Commission meeting on November 26 with his Sri Lankan counterpart Prof GL Peiris. According to Indian press note Joint Commission discussions covered all areas of bilateral relevance, including trade, services and investment, development cooperation, science and technology, culture and education. 

Krishna in a media briefing on arrival reminded Sri Lanka on the need for a structured dialogue mechanism with a mutual understanding of both parties in finding a political solution to the ethnic issue. He also said India would continue to assist Sri Lanka on various issues such as resettlement, rehabilitation, de-mining and agriculture development.

He alos inaugurated Indian consulates in Jaffna and Hambantota. While the Jaffna consulate would lessen the hardship of Tamil travellers to India, the Hambantota consulate would facilitate greater trade and investment from India likely when the area around the port develops and marine traffic increases.

Krishna also inaugurated the pilot project to construct 1000 houses for internally displaced people in Vanni. This is a part of India-aided project to construct 50,000 houses. He also flagged off the work on the Medawachchiya-Madhu railway line being constructed by Indian engineers with India’s assistance. Work will also begin simultaneously on the Madhu-Talaimannar and Omanthai-Pallai railway lines, which are being revived with Indian assistance. 

Pakistan President Zardari’s visit

Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari paid a four-day state visit to Sri Lanka at the invitation of President Rajapaksa from November 26. Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, and Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar and a business delegation accompanied the Pak President.

Following bilateral talks between the two presidents, four agreements relating to visa abolition of diplomatic and official passports, agricultural cooperation, and assistance in Customs matters and agreement on the fields on arts and creative studies were signed on November 28.

November 30, 2010

Reproduced from South Asia Security Trends Vol 4 No 11

Copyright: www.security-risks.com

Sri Lanka: False Notes in Rajapaksa's Second Symphony

By Col R Hariharan

 

President Mahinda Rajapaksa started his second innings as President when he was sworn in at an auspicious hour on November 19, 2010 with all the pomp and ceremony associated with the coronation of royalty. “It Is fitting in a way” thousands of his supporters would say because President Rajapaksa is now “monarch of all he surveys.” Not only his United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) has bagged two thirds majority in parliament but also dutifully amended the Constitutional two-term restriction imposed on presidents. With that the President’s second tenure that would have been his swan song, has now been turned into an orchestration for a second symphony, with options open for him to compose more.

Though the beaming President Rajapaksa looked supremely confident as he watched a military parade and the screaming fly past of air force jets on the occasion, there were a few false notes within few days of the second term.

• The first came when 104 members out of 161 members of the UPFA coalition were ushered into a jumbo cabinet. It included the prime minister, the new class of 11 senior ministers, 61 ministers and 31 deputy ministers. In his first term Rajapaksa’s coalition did not enjoy the advantage of two-thirds majority and his adoption of the ‘jumbo cabinet’ strategy to strengthen his coalition in parliament had some validity. But why has he fallen to the same ‘jumbo’ tactic? Does it mean he has doubts about retaining the loyalties of his coalition members? With his mass popularity, does the President really feel politically insecure? This doubt is further reinforced when we see the senior ministers - trusted lieutenants of earlier years - have been given the option of attending cabinet meetings when they chose, despite holding high sounding portfolios! Have they been put to pasture? Does it mean the President wants to keep them at arms length in his decision making process?

• The second jarring note is the way portfolios have been allotted to the ministers. In spite of such large number of ministers, the President has retained the vital portfolios of defence, finance and planning, ports and aviation and highways under him. President’s brother Basil Rajapaksa will be handling planning and development as before. The portfolios allocated to other ministers and deputy ministers are confusing. They also appear apportioned from cohesive entities, and we can expect the ministers to trample upon each others territory. Does this mean the President has little confidence in his cabinet members in delivering his development agenda of which he has been speaking at length? Or is it for more mundane reasons of keeping the ministers on the leash as they look for small pickings?

 Of course, there was also the President’s ill-timed, if not ill-advised, visit to the U.K. to address the Oxford Union. The President’s 100-strong entourage  marked a big occasion in his calculus. The organisers aborted the meeting the day before it was scheduled for reasons of security after a well orchestrated protest march of Sri Lankan Tamil expatriates, largely peppered with Tamil Tiger acolytes, threatened to converge on Oxford to disrupt the meeting. The Tamil protest had a well-timed added provocation when Channel 4 TV beamed an old but more detailed version of the gruesome slaughter of Tamil women captives allegedly by Sri Lankan army soldiers in uniform. The British government kept the legendary stiff upper lip and had nothing to say Oxford SNAFU as Rajapaksa’s visit was ‘unofficial.’ Wikileaks also added its pennyworth up loading cables on how the US ambassador Ms Patricia Butenis felt the President and his team had collective responsibility for war crimes.

The President bravely weathered the cold rebuff in Oxford in the icy British winter and went home to a thundering reception by an adulatory crowd. Regardless of the Tamil Tigers colouring of the war crimes issue, the Oxford experience should be a moment of truth for the President. He has to face the issue squarely at the international level and clean up, if not erase, his and Sri Lanka’s image blurred by war crimes allegation. No locally compounded formulation of the Lesson Learnt Commission-kind will can do this. Solutions like the one proposed by his irrepressible minister Mervyn Silva to educate all Englishmen from the highest officers to the lowest on Mahinda Chinthanaya can only provide comic relief. Sri Lanka has a credibility deficit in this respect. And this has to be overcome.

The President in a recent interview given to N Ram, the Editor in chief of the Hindu, had explained the rationale behind getting the constitutional two-term bar on the president lifted. He said he had found in the past, presidents were effective only in the first year of their second term after which they became lame ducks. As per this reasoning, the lifting of the constitutional limitation would enable him to use the second term fully for “development of the people.” If that was his idea, neither his cabinet nor its structuring gives confidence of fulfilling Rajapaksa’s hopes.

Moreover, with the abolishing of the two-term limitation for the President, Sri Lanka may end up with a life time president, though Rajapaksa had disclaimed any such intention in his Hindu interview. Going by his demonstrated political acumen, President Rajapaksa is probably shrewder than other ‘life term’ presidents of the world to make such a mistake. Some of the ‘life termers’ who rose to pinnacle of fame ultimately ended up in the dust bin of history. [Of course, there is a modern day precedence of a president who became an emperor! Jean Bèdel Bokassa, President of Central African Republic, declared himself President for Life in 1972 and crowned himself as emperor in 1976! Of course, he was overthrown later and died in custody is a matter of inconvenient detail.]    

As Oliver Goldsmith wrote “Popular glory is a perfect coquette; her lovers must toil, feel every inquietitude, indulge every caprice, and perhaps at last jilted in the bargain.” President Rajapaksa needs to rewrite his opening of the second symphony lest it fails at the altar of popular glory. He needs it to get his development agenda succeed.

 

Spotlight on India-Sri Lanka Relations

By Col R Hariharan (Retd.)

Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s visit to New Delhi during the month ostensibly to attend the closing ceremony of the 19^th Commonwealth Games in New Delhi during the month is of significance. He was the only head of state to be invited by India for the closing ceremony underlining the special status the President and Sri Lanka enjoy in India’s foreign policy perceptions. The visit has to be seen in the overall context of growing relations between the two countries in three dimensions – internal politics, external dimension, and long term relations.

Internal political dimension

There is a strong internal political dimension both in India and Sri Lanka on the Sri Lankan Tamil issue. While Rajapaksa has politically strengthened himself in Sri Lanka giving him a free hand, Dr Manmohan Singh does not have this luxury. Despite the Congress party’s success in the last parliamentary election, the ruling United Progressive Alliance is conditioned by the fortunes of  its close ally in Tamil Nadu – the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by its octogenarian leader and Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi. President Rajapaksa had never been popular in Chennai both because of the Eelam War and after that due to his seemingly indifferent attitude in providing political space for Tamil minority. New Delhi’s CWG invitation to Rajapaksa came at an inconvenient time for Karunanidhi. The visit provided another handle to some of the opposition parties in Tamil Nadu that have already been castigating “Big Brother” DMK of pandering to New Delhi’s policy of condoning Sri Lanka’s excesses against Tamils during the war.

As Tamil Nadu assembly elections are nearing the two major local political coalitions led by the ruling DMK and its rival the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) are in the process of being reshaped. It is poised at a delicate stage and there is a lot of political posturing and sparring going on in retaining Congress support for DMK. DMK’s aging leader Karunanidhi’s sons are locked in a succession battle introducing an element of uncertainty in the future of the party. To ward off an eruption of internal conflict, Karunanidhi continues to be the chief minister and also lead the party despite incapacitation due to aging. This makes DMK politically more vulnerable than before. And AIADMK chief Ms Jayalalitha is already smelling blood.

Though Sri Lanka issue is not an issue of political mainstream in the state,  Karunanidhi’s handling of it during the Eelam War and its aftermath has exposed his political limitations due to his partnership in central coalition. To compensate for this he had frequently been goading New Delhi for action in a bid to show solidarity with the population on the Sri Lanka Tamil issue. And dutifully New Delhi had been echoing his concerns to Colombo. Before Rajapaksa’s latest visit to New Delhi, the Tamil Nadu chief Minister briefly met Ms Sonia Gandhi, the Congress Party chief, during her visit to Chennai and submitted a memorandum seeking her help in ensuring the rehabilitation of internally-displaced Tamils lodged in camps in Sri Lanka. In the memorandum he said “Inasmuch as the hapless Sri Lankan Tamils continue to suffer in the camps for the last 18 months, there must be some firm political commitment to end the sufferings of these people.” So it was not surprising that Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna echoed similar thoughts when he spoke the media on the occasion of Rajapaksa’s visit. He said India felt it was “time to act decisively to win over Tamil-speaking Sri Lankans so that their concerns were taken care of adequately.” Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh also used the opportunity provided by the visit to once again express India’s desire for Sri Lanka to act “decisively” on moving towards a political settlement “to bridge the ethnic divide.”  

Though Rajapaksa understands New Delhi’s political compulsions, he does not want to be seen as a ‘follower’ of India as his support base in Sri Lanka is mostly made up of Southern Sinhala voters. This attitude was evident when Sri Lankan Minister for External Affairs GL Peiris commenting on Rajapaksa-Manmohan Singh meeting tried to downplay the issue. He said “It was a very cordial meeting. No issue was discussed at length, but India wanted to know our plans. We indicated that we want to talk to a broader spectrum of stakeholders. That is the only way to do this, to get their ideas and to build a consensus.”  In his interview to the Hindu, he said “The Tamils' response has been good. They are coming on board.” Though there had been some progress on this count, it is not wholly correct to say the Tamil minorities are coming on board. Though the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), former political allies of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), leader P Sampanthan and other Tamil MPs had met the President twice and discussed the political issues, their active participation in political mainstream remains an open question.

President Rajapaksa has also gone back on his earlier promise to India on implementing 13^th amendment of Sri Lanka constitution to devolve powers to provinces after the war. The 13th amendment came into being after India and Sri Lanka signed a pact in 1987 under which Colombo agreed to devolve powers to provinces to satisfy restive minorities, mainly Tamils. Though 13^th amendment has largely lost its relevance in the present Sri Lankan political context, Sri Lanka stand has placed New Delhi in piquant situation. Despite this, Sri Lanka would like to do it on its own terms. During his Delhi visit the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister was categorical on the subject: "It is impossible to talk of exact time frame for implementing the 13th amendment, it is a great mistake to do because if you talk of timeframe and then you are not able to complete the process, it is bound to be conjecture, speculative, then there is erosion of credibility." This shows the lack of credibility in Sri Lanka’s promises.

If these signals are read collectively, in plain terms, India is not at all happy at the snail’s pace at which Sri Lanka was handling the Tamil issue.  The Indian foreign minister is now scheduled to visit Colombo on November 25. This issue will probably figure again on top of his agenda when he takes part in the India-Sri Lanka Joint Commission (ISJC) meeting scheduled on November 26 and 27. The decision to revive the ISJC meetings was taken during the President’s latest meeting with Indian Prime Minister. The meetings, interrupted during the war years, provide a formal forum to thrash out vexing issues between the two countries.

External dimensions

Apart from internal political compulsions, Indo-Sri Lanka relations also have a context in India’s increasing concern at the growing Chinese presence in South Asia particularly its assertive stance and presence in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Colombo is aware of Indian sensitivity on the subject, which was probably once again stressed at Rajspaksa’s meeting in New Delhi.

Sri Lanka-China relations are growing fast due to aggressive Chinese diplomacy as well as Colombo’s economic compulsions. So Colombo is probably being cautious in every action relating to China lest it affects its close relationship with India. This could be the reason for Sri Lanka to put a clamp on all information on Chinese activity in Sri Lanka including the number of Chinese workers, or details of progress on the projects the Chinese have taken up. Usually such information is freely available; it seems all government departments including Customs and Immigration appear to have been advised to keep mum on the subject.  

At the same time Rajapaksa would like to continue to builder better relations with China as a strategic ploy to balance Indian dominance as well as for the economic largesse China had been dishing out to Sri Lanka. Close on the heels of October visit to India, Rajapaksa made a three-day visit to Beijing and met with Premier Wen Jiabao. According to media, Chinese Premier pledged to continue all development assistance to Sri Lanka. The two leaders discussed the progress of development projects currently being carried out with the assistance of the Chinese Government. Wen also promised China's assistance to develop infrastructure, particularly the highway network and bridges. They also discussed on the Hambantota port development project, the largest project in Sri Lanka carried out with Chinese funding.

Sri Lanka also needs continued Indian diplomatic support in handling its international relations which has run into a lot of opposition for its poor human rights record and for ignoring international allegations of war crimes. The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) constituted by the President to partially satisfy the international outcry has not met with large scale acceptance. This was highlighted during the month when three major INGOs - Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and International Crisis Group rejected Sri Lanka’s invitation to testify before the Commission. In a joint letter they contended the commission would not operate independently as some of its members were government servants during the war and it had no real mandate to probe alleged war crimes in the last stages of the Eelam War.

According to the United Nations, more than 7,000 civilians were killed in the last five months of the conflict. In June, the U.N. appointed a three-member panel to look into alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian laws. The US has also said the LLRC should identify those responsible for the serious violation of international humanitarian laws that occurred during the conflict. Sri Lanka has continued to ignore the issue claiming international moves as interference in its internal affairs. Significantly India has maintained a silent stance on the issue. This has encouraged Sri Lanka to maintain its hard stand.

Long term relationship

Already the two nations enjoy close political relations at international level and their relations in trade, investment, infrastructural linkages and defence cooperation are improving. There is a general, broad-based improvement across all sectors of the relationship.

India has also taken a number of initiatives to further cement India-Sri Lanka relations in the long term. This has a strong security aspect; building military to military relations, particularly between the two navies and the Indian Coast Guard is expected to remain a key part of it. This was evident when the Indian army and naval chiefs visited Sri Lanka recently. The Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy, Vice Admiral Thisara Samarasinghe, made an eight-day official visit to India commencing in October 2010. During his visit he observed a fleet exercise in the Indian Navy’s Eastern Naval Command at Vishakapatnam. Four ships of the training squadron of the Indian Navy including INS Tir, INS Shardul, INS Tarangini and Coast Guard vessel Varuna visited Sri Lanka in October.  About 150 Sri Lanka Navy personnel were provided an opportunity to train onboard Indian ships. These activities would indicate the sustained effort at building bonds between the two navies.

India has continued to maintain vigilance in ensuring that it does not become a cockpit of either revival of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) or the take off point for escaping LTTE fellow travellers seeking refuge in Canada and Australia. The arrest of four persons including Sakthivel, the Pondichery DMK municipal Councilor and Logu Ayyappan, Puduchery Periyar Dravida Kazhagam President during the month for in a ring for illegally transporting Sri Lankan refugees from Pondicherry coast to Australia is a case in point.

Apart from Indian participation in infrastructure projects, India is involved in the proposed Indian aided coal-fired power plant at Sampur, an ambitious project to build 50,000 housing units at a cost of $ 300 million with Indian grant for the war displaced families. Already an Indian project to provide 55 buses to local bodies, schools and other institutions a cost SL Rs. 92.95 million has been launched. The visiting Indian external affairs will be launching a pilot project to build 1,000 housing units in the Vanni on November 25; this is part of the mega housing project being undertaken in the region. These are some of the significant Indian steps to broaden its relevance to Sri Lanka while building a close relationship.

Conclusion

President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s political consolidation and the growing Chinese presence in Sri Lanka have circumscribed India’s current political leverages in Sri Lanka. At the same time, historical and geographical realities of the Indian Ocean region and India’s strategic strength dictate that in its own interest Sri Lanka should sustain its friendly relations with India. India also appears to have realised the need to build a win-win relationship with its island neighbour for the same reasons.

The growth of a win-win relationship can be affected under three circumstances: (1) if the Sri Lanka’s actions are perceived as affecting India’s national security, (2) the public mood in Tamil Nadu becomes strident if and when Sri Lankan Tamils become restive once again over their long pending grievances, and (c) Chinese and Pakistani influence over Sri Lanka grows at India’s expense. In the near term, chances of any one of the three prospects turning into reality appear remote. So given the political and public goodwill existing in both countries for each other, the relations are poised for further growth, despite occasional hiccups over specific issues. 
October 31, 2010
Courtesy: South Asia Security Security Trends Vol 4 No 10
www.security-risks.com 

 

Sri Lanka: The Rajapaksa juggernaut rolls on

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

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

Sri Lanka: Fonseka’s Perils of Playing Politics and its Implications

By Col R Hariharan

For General Sarath Fonseka who revamped a demoralised Sri Lanka army and led it to final victory in the nearly three-decade long campaign against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May 2009, its aftermath had not been peaceful. His woes appear to be mounting after an army court martial found him guilty of dabbling in politics while in uniform and recommended his cashiering. And President Mahinda Rajapaksa promptly confirmed the harsh sentence, stripping his rank and hard earned military honours and medals. The hapless General is facing a few more court martial that would haunt him in the coming years.

It will be difficult for non-military minds to understand the ignominy of cashiering. It is much more than stripping of rank and medals of General Fonseka (I do not have the heart to drop his rank and call him Mister Fonseka, although this is what has been reduced to now). It is the negation of the contribution of a person who served the army for 38 years to become the first-ever chief of defence staff. And in the history of Sri Lanka his victory against the Tamil insurgents will always be hyphenated with his cashiering. Only four years back he was lucky enough to escape (with serious injuries) a LTTE suicide bomber assassination attempt him in 2006. It seems the perils of politics have proved more deadly to the General than the Tamil Tiger assassin.

As I am not privy to Fonseka’s court martial proceedings or judgement I am unable to comment on its legality. Even if his political contacts were substantive as decided by the court, Fonseka was neither the first Sri Lankan army officer to do so nor will he be the last. The history of Sri Lanka’s three decades of war against the LTTE is strewn with examples of army officers either favoured or discarded by political masters, not necessarily for reasons of military competency. So it will be reasonable to conclude the Fonseka episode has its seeds in politics of power; after all the government has not shown the same alacrity shown in prosecuting the General to put on the dock even a single hardened LTTE leader held in custody for over a year.

This is evident if we see the sequence of events after the war ended and General Fonseka was hailed as a national hero, sharing the victory banners alongside the President. Politicians were a little unnerved at the soaring popularity of the General after the war and a subdued campaign sideline his contribution in the Eelam War was launched.

The campaign within the government against the General gained more decibels when he spoke of his plans to expand the army, making the politicians even more nervous. Though his plan was not accepted, the government’s mind on his future became clear when it decided not to extend his tenure as Chief of Staff after December 2009 when it ended. The process of cutting down the war hero to size was truly in place when the government offered him the job of secretary in the ministry of sports after his retirement!

The point of no return was probably reached when he developed political ambitions and decided to throw his gauntlet against President Mahinda Rajapaksa seeking his second term as president. The situation was further aggravated when the deeply divided opposition rallied together to put him up as their common candidate against Rajapaksa. In the run up to the presidential poll, Fonseka’s campaign threw a scare, though ultimately he polled fewer votes than Ranil Wickremesinghe did in the presidential election 2005.

The presidential election campaign saw the transformation of the General, generally considered a Sinhala hawk, into a champion of Tamil problem. And it was anachronistic to see that elements of Tamil Diaspora that had supported the LTTE, which tried to kill him, were his election bedfellows! Even as the pre-election campaign gathered momentum, political screws against the General were tightened. Conspiracy theories of military coup and take over abounded, Gajaba regiment troops deployed for his security were withdrawn for suspected personal loyalty to the General and serving officers considered loyal to Fonseka were given the walking papers. Even the retired servicemen who supported him were not spared. And in a clear break from the past even some elements of army joined the tar brush brigade to paint Fonseka as a villain during the election campaign. The smear campaign had three parts; prosecution of the General on the legal cases relating to three aspects.

The army and civil intelligence sleuths have "discovered" a whole range of offences committed by the General during his tenure as army commander. Presumably there was a prima facie case at least in some of them. But their inaction in showing the same diligence they later displayed when he became political loose cannon is rather intriguing.

Thus in an oblique way it was the General’s rapid rise in national popularity charts that did him in. It led him to the bogs of party politics and he quickly got entangled in its culture of intrigues and character assassination. Otherwise he would have probably ended up enjoying his well earned retirement, expanding on his concept of counter terrorism warfare in haloed portals of military learning everywhere.

But his prosecution has shown the weakness of Sri Lankan system in action where checks and balances of government action appear to have been sacrificed to serve political interest. While this is inevitable in party-politics it is detrimental to the long term interest of healthy growth of democracy. At present Sri Lanka is involved in a serious exercise of revising its constitution. A key dilemma is the changeover of the present presidential system to a Westminster type parliamentary democracy, limiting the powers of executive president. A compromise is likely to be struck - to have the cake and eat it in typical South Asian style - by retaining the presidential system while clipping his powers. But constitution largely remains a document in parchment unless political parties and the people are able to exercise full powers guaranteed to them in the constitution. Will they be allowed to do this or become victims of maelstrom of power? This question has to be confronted not only by politicians and the civil society but the intelligentsia as well. Otherwise mere changes in constitutional structure will be a cosmetic surgery that does not cure the underlying maladies.

Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group, August 29, 2010
URL: http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cnotes6%5Cnote598.html