|
|||||
|
With his blunt message on May 31 that New Delhi does not approve of Colombo looking to Beijing or Islamabad or any other world capital for its defence requirements, India's National Security Adviser (NSA) M.K. Narayanan created a storm not only in the Palk Straits separating Sri Lanka and India but also in Pakistan. After a meeting with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi in Chennai, Narayanan made it known that India was ready to respond to Sri Lanka's "defensive requirements".
Predictably, the qualified offer kicked off a furore in the island-nation, with India being labelled a "bad neighbour", a "big brother" and a "bully". The fact that Narayanan chose Chennai to make the statement was interpreted variously as New Delhi taking dictation from Chennai on its Sri Lanka policy and as pandering to "regional sentiments".
There is little doubt that the statement was undiplomatic and uncharacteristic of the NSA, to say the least, but to Sri Lanka watchers it did not come as a shock. The truth is that from the time he assumed office in November 2005, President Mahinda Rajapaksa has had an uneasy relationship with the Manmohan Singh government. A pile-up of mismatched expectations on both sides contributed to the strained relationship. In a way, Narayanan's brusque comment is a reflection of the downslide.
Fissures in the ties between New Delhi and Colombo first surfaced when India spurned Rajapaksa's renewed offer of a defence pact during his first official trip to New Delhi as President in December 2005. The periodic war of words over fisherfolk issues; the slow progress on the promised devolution package; the humanitarian concerns in the North and the East after war broke out in June 2006 between the Tigers and the Sri Lanka military; the de-merger of the North and the East, albeit after the Supreme Court verdict; and the controversy over the efficacy of the India-gifted air defence system have all contributed to the widening gulf between India and Sri Lanka.
Significantly, Narayanan was the target of attack from every conceivable quarter in the island-nation, barring the government. It is not a coincidence that Narayanan's statement came two days after Sri Lanka's Defence Secretary, Gothabaya Rajapaksa travelled to New Delhi with a shopping list. One can only presume that the trip was not as productive as Gothabaya Rajapaksa would have wished it to be.
The Sri Lanka government's studied silence on Narayanan's statement did not deter others from taking barbs at him. Two key parties in the ruling coalition, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU), were equally loud in proclaiming that India could not dictate terms to Sri Lanka.
"India is our closest friend. It is essential for us to maintain that status. But when it comes to weapons we are compelled to transact with countries which actually fulfil our country's military requirement," said D.M. Jayaratne, Posts and Telecommunications and Rural Economic Development Minister who belongs to the SLFP.
The United National Party (UNP), the main Opposition party, chose to turn the tables on the government without getting into the issue directly. "Past leaders have handled this issue more prudently. The government is not in a position to identify its enemies and friends in the international arena. This issue is not like a dispute between brothers in a family," the UNP argued.
The response of the ultra-nationalist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) was restrained. In an open letter to the Indian High Commissioner titled `India should not return to bad neighbour policy', the leader of the party, Somawansa Amarasinghe, said Narayanan's statement made the party re-think its assessment that New Delhi had undergone a change of heart in its relations with its neighbours.
He said: "The JVP over the recent years have thought that India's bad neighbour policy had been changed. Hence the JVP began to think of India in very positive terms. But the recent statement of Mr. Narayanan, one-time head of Indian spy agencies, gives us to doubt that. As a sovereign nation, Sri Lanka has the full right to trade with any nation, including from where we should buy the best arms. India and Sri Lanka share a common heritage in many areas of culture. The JVP will always foster correct and amicable relations between our two countries but at the same time it will not shirk from its responsibility of standing for the full integrity and sovereignty of the country."
The letter complained that it was no secret that in spite of India claiming to change its policies towards Sri Lanka, it had been reluctant to help.
"It is also no secret that when China was to give us under very favourable terms a 3D radar system, India interfered and dissuaded us from getting that. The JVP's internal policies are for democracy and full equality of all citizens. To reach this goal requires the elimination of the racist and totalitarian LTTE structure. Recently, our MPs have been increasingly interacting with Indian political parties, especially of the Left, who have understood our principled position. A few weeks ago our delegates were well received in Tamil Nadu," Amarasinghe said.
In the media it was no-holds-barred barrage directed at Narayanan. In an editorial titled "Oppressive generosity?" Daily Mirror said India always believed that Pakistan was filling the vacuum created by the policy of distancing it had adopted of late. India continued to be perturbed by a possible Pakistan support to the Muslim jehad groups in the eastern part of Sri Lanka, it remarked.
"Mr. Narayanan's words have again reiterated what was always the real agenda towards Sri Lanka. Having trained, provided logistical support and financed the LTTE in its own soil, India always preferred to take the back door to the conflict," the editorial said. The paper said India should stop playing bully once again and understand the crucial nature of the assistance that both countries could provide each other.
The Island, in its editorial "Problems of being bully's buddy-II", said: "India always behaves like a sadist deriving, as she does, immense pleasure from the sufferings of her neighbours, like those cheap Indian soap opera characters who are full of hatred, envy, jealousy and hubris. She has a massive ego to nurse and this she does at the expense of others. She treats her neighbours as untouchables."
K. Godage, a former Foreign Service officer, in an open letter titled "If not offensive weapons, then what Mr. Narayanan?" asked if Narayanan wanted Colombo to ask New Delhi for catapults.
"There was a time when Indian hegemonists sought to use the stupid mismanagement of our foreign relations [and relations particularly with India] to `Bhutanise' this country and transform us into a vassal state... . They almost succeeded through the letters that were exchanged between Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and President Jayewardene as a part of the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement," Godage said.
He alleged that Indian territory was once again being used now, in violation of the Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement, to destabilise the island-nation, and asked what the Indian government was doing about it. "It appears that the Indian government finds utility in the continuance of this conflict in Sri Lanka," he said.
B. Muralidhar Reddy
Printer friendly
page
|
