Round The World

New Delhi, 24 January 2012

Sri Lanka Visit

NEED TO TACKLE IRRITANTS

By Monish Tourangbam

Senior Research Scholar, School of International Studies (JNU)

Foreign Minister Krishna’s latest visit to Sri Lanka was filled with the same amount of optimism and back patting that one has come to associate with such official calls. However, besides the usual acknowledgement of development and regular assessment of reconstruction activities (heavily funded by India), there are lingering irritants in the relationship that need to be taken up with greater clarity of purpose. India has a stake in the socio-political and economic stability of neighbouring Sri Lanka. Post civil-war, the Rajapaksa administration has shown extra zeal to take material development to the next level, inviting huge foreign investments. But, will the development story unfolding in Sri Lanka include the ethnic Tamils? The Rajapaksa administration has often been wanting when it comes to the crucial question of power devolution.

A Sinhala majority identity of Sri Lanka is imbedded in Colombo and a gentle push to increase its pace towards acknowledging a more diverse and inclusive country is critical. Indian policymakers face a dilemma, because economic statistics alone (unlike in China’s case) cannot explain the role that Indian funding plays in post-conflict Lanka. Much of Delhi’s aid is directed towards reconstruction of the conflict-hit zones and otherwise also meant to assist the growth of an inclusive country. Such considerations make India’s role all the more crucial.  

As the Rajapaksa administration walks the talk towards rebuilding Sri Lanka, Indian policymakers have had to constantly walk a tightrope. New Delhi has had to continue increasing its ties with the government and at the same time insist on the need for a sincere political reconciliation. The government won the civil war, and decimated the LTTE but at the cost of huge collateral damage and accusations of human rights abuses, with many Tamil civilians being internally displaced.

Western voices questioning the Sri Lankan army’s human rights records have not made life easier for Rajapaksa, who had constituted the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) to investigate the matter; but not everyone is happy with the results so far. Specifically, the Human Rights Watch in its World Report 2012 states that the long-awaited LLRC report, “largely absolved the military for its conduct in the bloody final months of the war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which ended in May 2009.”

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the umbrella organization of Tamil political parties in Sri Lanka, has also rejected the LLRC report. In its 70-page analytical Response to the LLRC Report, the TNA arguing that the report failed to meet international standards called for international community’s intervention.

On its part, India has cautiously welcomed the LLRC report saying “these recommendations, when implemented, would mark a major step forward in the process of genuine national reconciliation, to which the Sri Lankan government is committed” and “Sri Lanka must seize this opportunity.”  Perhaps, New Delhi at this point of time believes that the Rajapaksa government should not be pushed to a corner as it could harden its stance on other issues, which a post-conflict country and the ethnic Tamils hardly need.

As this matter is to soon come up at the United Nations Human Rights Council, Colombo would surely want to count on India’s assistance and understanding and the latter could seriously consider using this as a leveraging tool to diplomatically nudge the Rajapaksa government towards hastening the process of political reconciliation between the conflict-affected northern and eastern regions. Representatives of Tamil aspirations in Sri Lankan, however, appear to be highly skeptical of their government.   

Additionally, talks between Tamil groups and the Government don’t seem be making much headway, and it is high time, Colombo started talking on specific and substantive issues of political settlement. Till now, debates on the issue have articulated only those subjects the government is unwilling to devolve, i.e. police powers and land administration. The government seems to be dragging its feet, despite concurring with India’s concerns and emphasizing that it is committed towards implementing the “13^th Amendment Plus” approach.

Offering a sort of explanation to the “Plus” terminology, a representative of the Sri Lankan government, has stated that it expects to establish a Senate representing minority groups and academics as a “viable link between the Central government and the provinces.” The Minister said that the 13th Amendment to the Constitution is already a part of the Constitution since 1987, the establishment of the Senate denotes what is being called the “13+ or 13 and beyond” approach.

But, the TNA has reportedly rejected the government's proposal. TNA spokesman and Jaffna District parliamentarian Suresh Premachandran speaking to the media stated: “Senate meant power sharing at the center but what the TNA was demanding was devolution of power to the periphery.” As such, a deadlock is casting its shadows on any further step towards a meaningful political settlement.

Another issue that directly impacts Indian citizens in the southern state of Tamil Nadu is the issue of fishermen, who are routinely caught and even allegedly killed by the Sri Lankan Navy at the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) in the Palk Strait. Fishermen issues have been recurring for long and some fishermen were allegedly attacked with stones by the Sri Lanka Navy near the IMBL after Krishna raised the issue in Colombo. More importantly, just ahead of Krishna’s bilateral visit, the Joint Working Group on Fisheries between the two countries also discussed the issue with the Indian side stressing that use of force against fishermen, including by civilians, is not justifiable under any circumstances. 

Despite repeated assurances at high-level talks, that no force by security forces on fishermen would be used “under any circumstances”, continued arrest of Indian fishermen and alleged killings have increased the ire in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, which also has raised questions over the sincerity of the Rajapaksa government to work towards an inclusive Sri Lanka, where the ethnic Tamils would become a part of the growth story in the country. Opposition parties in India have accused the UPA government of paying only lip service on the fishermen issue. Condemning the latest attack on Indian fishermen allegedly by Sri Lankan Naval personnel, CPI leader D Raja said that India should reopen the 1974 agreement ceding Katchatheevu to the island nation to find a lasting solution to the recurring mid-sea incidents.

Hence, despite India’s heavy investment in the reconstruction process and a host of other agreements covering diverse sectors, which the two governments intends to showcase in every high level visit, lingering concerns remain over maritime boundaries, fishing rights and over the  fate of the ethnic Tamils in a post-conflict Sri Lanka. But, bilateral relations and diplomacy is determined by a host of interests intersecting, which at times might put some constraints and challenges. While India can and should use political and economic leverage to influence the Rajapaksa government towards meaningful power devolution in the country, one needs to be mindful of the fact that the Tamil issue is a primary determinant of India’s policy toward Sri Lanka but not the only one. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)