Indian Role in Sri Lanka

" Sadly, past Sri Lankan efforts to forge a national consensus for a political settlement have failed because partisan considerations have prevailed over long-term national interests. It now seems clear that All-Parties Conference will recommend implementation of the proposals for devolution contained in the 1987 India-Sri Lankan Agreement, which were incorporated in the 13th Amendment of the Sri Lankan Constitution in 1988."

________________________________________

by G. Parthasarathy

(January 24, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) Sri Lanka's Foreign Minister Rohita Bollagama announced on January 4 that the Cabinet had decided on January 2 to abrogate the ceasefire agreement between the Government and the LTTE, which was signed by former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe and LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran. Mr Bollagama averred, "The abrogation of the 2002 ceasefire agreement, which was fundamentally flawed, actually created space for a more inclusive peace process, which will guarantee sustainable peace in the country." He said that Tamil groups other than the LTTE would be able to participate in the peace process. He also added that as a result of the abrogation of the ceasefire, Norway, which was facilitating and monitoring the peace process, would have a different role, which has to be "redefined".

The Government of Sri Lanka has been unhappy with the Norwegian role in the peace process. There was a strong feeling that the Norwegians were unduly accommodative in dealing with LTTE transgressions. Moreover, like other European countries which are largely monolithic in racial and religious terms, Norway had little understanding of the imperatives of national unity in pluralistic Asian countries.

Mr Bollagama said that while his Government was in favour of talks with the LTTE, the guiding factor would be the maintenance of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. As soon as the ceasefire agreement abrogation came into force on January 16, the LTTE struck with a terrorist attack on innocent bus passengers in southern Sri Lanka. The abrogation of the ceasefire raised fears internationally that the ethnic conflict would escalate. It was evident that the Government was determined to destroy the LTTE militarily.

There is now a broad consensus in Sri Lanka that given its commitment to that country's unity and territorial integrity, India should play a more active role in facilitating a political solution. New Delhi has, thus far, taken a backseat because the negotiations included the LTTE, which is a proclaimed terrorist organisation, while other moderate Tamil groups have been excluded. Indian interests cannot, however, be safeguarded if distant countries peddle their formulations in dealing with a problem so closely linked to Indian security interests. By seeking to "redefine" the Norwegian role, so that "many countries" may get involved in the process, Mr Bollagama was signalling that Sri Lanka welcomed a more active Indian role in the quest for peace. India will have to tailor its role and use its clout so that the Sri Lanka 'Donors Conference', comprising the US, the EU, Japan and the UK, can complement its efforts.

Responding to a query on the abrogation of the ceasefire in Sri Lanka, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee observed: "We have to see what impact it has. Of late clashes between Sri Lankan forces and LTTE terrorists have increased. So far as terrorism is concerned, our position is that of zero tolerance (of terrorism). So any country that takes action against terrorists is free to do so within its legal system."

Mr Mukherjee added that India wanted Colombo to seek a political solution to the ethnic issue. He said: "So far as solution to the problems of the ethnic minorities, including Tamils, is concerned, so that their legitimate aspirations are fulfilled within the Sri Lankan system, that part should not be lax and efforts must continue to arrive at a solution." The most crucial aspects of Mr Mukherjee's comments are that India continues to regard the LTTE as a terrorist organisation and that a political settlement which meets the legitimate aspirations of Tamils must be within the framework of the unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka.

Sadly, past Sri Lankan efforts to forge a national consensus for a political settlement have failed because partisan considerations have prevailed over long-term national interests. It now seems clear that All-Parties Conference will recommend implementation of the proposals for devolution contained in the 1987 India-Sri Lankan Agreement, which were incorporated in the 13th Amendment of the Sri Lankan Constitution in 1988. Moreover, it will also be essential for Sri Lanka to legislatively implement the provisions of the "Constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka Amendment Bill" of August 3, 2000, and end human rights violations of innocent Tamils. This Constitutional Amendment Bill was presented after extensive consultations by Ms Chandrika Kumaratunga's advisers, Mr GL Peiris and Mr Neelan Tiruchelvan, and lapsed because of domestic opposition.

The implementation of this Bill, together with the 1988 Constitutional Amendment will largely address Tamil concerns and aspirations. Tamil will join Sinhala as an official a language of that country; and, there will be a merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces, with a single Provincial Administration headed by Chief Minister, enjoying powers akin to that of the Chef Minister of a State in India. The merger will remain in force till a referendum in the eastern districts is held to decide whether they want a separate province.

At the conclusion of his visit to Sri Lanka on January 15, Japan's Special Envoy Yasushi Akashi warned of the dangers of Sri Lanka seeking a military solution to the ethnic conflict. He urged the Government of Sri Lanka to come up with a credible devolution package to be offered to the "relevant parties, including the LTTE". Given the demands of the LTTE and Prabhakaran's belief in ruling a separate 'Tamil Eelam' as a one-party state, the LTTE will inevitably reject any package that does not meet its demands. It is in this context that New Delhi should work out a strategy of encouraging the Sri Lankan Government, the Opposition UNP, with whom it has maintained cordial relations, and with moderate Tamil groups to pass the August 2000 Constitutional Amendment Bill.

An early visit to Sri Lanka, possibly during the 60th anniversary of Sri Lanka's independence on February 7, by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, where such an understanding could be formalised, will enable India, acting together with the international community, to mount pressure, including tighter international sanctions on the LTTE, to fall in line.

At least 1,195 soldiers of the Indian Peace Keeping Force laid down their lives to guarantee the unity and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. Their sacrifices would not have been in vain, if Mr Singh uses the occasion of his visit to inaugurate a memorial, which the Government of Sri Lanka is building in Colombo, honouring these soldiers.