A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, July 9, 2018
Sri Lanka: Rajapaksa politics after “the Port Saga”
The reader should remember that during Rajapaksa administration, the law was applied either swiftly or slowly. It depended on which side of the Rajapaksa corporate megalith you stood.
( July 8, 2018, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The phrase ‘Cough up a Port’ held the essence
of the New York Times story. It compacted the global perception of the
Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa Port and its progression to date, into the
finite space of the simple phrase – Sri Lanka coughed up a port to
China.
The ‘cough’ metaphor made Mahinda Rajapaksa acolytes puke an
unbelievable quantity of vitriol and venom at two Sri Lankan journalists
who professionally assisted the NYT journalist to carry out her
assignment in the form of logistical support and background material.
Reasonable minds are baffled by the incendiary indignation and
obsessional opprobrium manufactured and vented out by the former
President and his substantial support base.
The Rajapaksa corporate megalith has no patience with a vibrant Free
Press. Brother Gotabaya demonstrated how the press can be tamed. He took
The Sunday Leader to court. The litigation dragged on until the
publisher was forced to sell the outfit that was being sued for billions
in damages. The investor ready to take over the paper that was
stubbornly critical of the Rajapakse regime was a close confidante of
the ruling family. The editor of the paper, who opted serve under the
new management did not last long. After a telephone spat with the
Defense Secretary over the airlifting of puppy from Switzerland the
luckless lady decided on voluntary exile.
The reader should remember that in those days, the law was applied
either swiftly or slowly. It depended on which side of the Rajapaksa
corporate megalith you stood.
The beleaguered publisher sold out to a party that was confident of
reaching a settlement with the plaintiff – the once all-powerful Defence
Secretary. Then, something unexpected happened. ‘Conspiring Western
powers persuaded the people’ to vote out Mahinda. Meanwhile, the new
publisher fired the legal counsel who was subjecting the plaintiff to
rigorous cross examination. The plaintiff decided to be reasonable.
Instead of the billions demanded, a settlement was reached. The paper
published a no-holds barred apology to Gotabaya Rajapaksa, which
sacrilegiously also admitted that the story so painstakingly researched,
investigated and written by Lasantha Wickrematunge’s editorial team,
was baseless. The Sinhala dictum – Naduth Hamuduruwange, Baduth
Hamuduruwange ‘entered our legal lore.
It bears mention that the defamation case in question was filed over
Wickrematunge’s consistent exposes with regard to the controversial
purchase of MiG-27 ground attack aircraft for the Sri Lanka Air Force.
An FCID investigation into this same transaction has delivered an
Interpol Red Notice on former President Rajapaksa’s nephew Udyanga
Weeratunga and forced the former Defence Secretary to make an appeal at
the Supreme Court to prevent his arrest in connection with the case.
Twelve years ago, Lasantha Wickrematunge conducted his own investigation
into the transaction, filing away hundreds of Government documents to
substantiate the facts he published in his newspaper.
Fast forward to 2018. In respect to the allegations made by the New York
Times, the former President has decided to seek redress in Sri Lanka.
Addressing a gathering at a Buddhist temple, he blamed the local
journalists and announced that he would institute legal proceedings
against publications that reproduced the NYT story about the port that
was coughed up.
Mahinda is the arch realist. Litigating in New York is a different ball
game. He has access to expert advice in the shape of brothers Basil and
Gotabaya. Both are well acquainted with the constitutional and legal
order in the US. They have passed the written and oral tests on the
subject conducted by the INS- the Immigration and Naturalization Service
of the United States. Mahinda is truly fortunate. He has the combined
wisdomof the hands-on knowledge of his two brothers plus the remote
wisdom of Prof G.L. Pieris.
In the natural order of global commerce, creditors exercise better
bargaining power than debtors who are hocked up to their throats, chins
and noses.
Nations incur debt in order to meet pressing priorities. Nations saddled
with narcissist leaders do not borrow for priorities of the people.
Driven by a desire to be remembered in history and spurred by the urgent
need to put in place a dynastic succession plan, narcissist leaders are
not deterred by the need or the necessity to repay loans. They mislead
themselves by the illusory hope that creditors will be circumspect in
their demands or be dazzled and deceived by declarations of good intent
as they do with their captive people.
The Indians refused to help build the Magampura Port on grounds of its
feasibility. The Chinese obliged on specified terms and conditions of
repayment. Sri Lanka wanted the port at Hambanthota. D.A. Rajapaksa had
mooted the proposal in the State Council. His son the President of Sri
Lanka wanted it commissioned on his 65th Birthday.
The Chinese too wanted a modem port outside its immediate borders in the
south. The Middle Kingdom formulates its strategies in terms of decades
and centuries. The Chinese had on their drawing boards, plans for a
deep-sea port in Kyauk Pyu in the Rakhine Province of Myanmar. They were
quietly wooing the ruling junta, and later the reluctantly democratic
khaki outfit that succeeded it that Kyauk Pyu port was a win-win for
both Myanmar and China.
When Sri Lanka wanted funds for Hambantota, the Chinese found it to be a
good game of poker for a port. Viyathmaga academics and professionals
should seriously take up maritime geography.
When completed, the $ 7.3 billion deep water port will also host a $2.7
billion industrial zone that opens into the Bay of Bengal. It will have
two parallel pipelines carrying oil and natural gas to the Yunnan
Province in China. The Kyauk Pyu port when fully commissioned will
naturally impact the performance of the Port in Hambantota. It may
impact Trincomalee as well.
The NYT correspondent Maria Abi-Habib cites the positive response of the
Chinese to Sri Lanka’s request for funds to build a port, an example of
China’s ambitious use of loans and aid to gain influence around the
world — and of its willingness to play hardball to collect. The Chinese
knew the kind of pseudo experts and policy makers they were dealing
with. Soon after the inauguration of the Port, the Lankan Ports
Authority quoted the Singaporean Ambassador. The Singapore Ambassador in
Sri Lanka is supposed to have said after touring the Port in
Hambantota, “We’d better find ourselves another job”. Sri Lanka being at
the very epicentre of trade routes will be able to accommodate even the
largest of ships and cater to their needs.” In the hands of sycophants
of exceptional genius Mahinda Rajapaksa was the emperor permanently
ensconced in the dressing room trying out new robes.
Maria Abi-Habib ‘s conclusion and summing up are eminently precise and
deadly accurate. She explains, “Months of interviews with Sri Lankan,
Indian, Chinese and Western officials and analysis of documents and
agreements stemming from the port project present a stark illustration
of how China and the companies under its control ensured their interests
in a small country hungry for financing.”
She does not suggest that the Magampura Mahinda Rajapaksa Port has been
turned into a Chinese military outpost. What she describes is the
perception of skeptical neighbours. “Indian officials, in particular,
fear that Sri Lanka is struggling so much that the Chinese Government
may be able to dangle debt relief in exchange for its military’s use.
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has reacted to the NYT article. The
Chinese government, he assures us “never pressurised Sri Lanka on this
matter. What the Chinese government wanted us to do was to get proposals
from Chinese companies to come up with proposals to run the Port
initially. The proposal from China Merchant Ports (CM Ports) was most
beneficial for Sri Lanka.”
CM Ports has agreed to invest USD 1.08 billion on the Port. The Chinese
Company and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority have entered into an agreement
after the proposal received Cabinet approval. “This is a victory as far
as the people in this country are concerned” says the Prime Minister.
The spin on the ‘victory ‘aspect of the Port deal requires some comment.
It becomes compulsory in the context of the doctrine of public trust
and the principle of transparency held high by this government as
opposed to the governance style of the Son of Hambantota. Dealing with
Contemporary China is neither feasible nor possible without knowing the
Thucydidean wisdom contained in the Melian dialogues. The great,
vibrant, determined and sprawling land mass of China with its
authoritarian market economy is classical Athens when dealing with small
nations as was learnt by ‘Sparta’ in the Greek wars of antiquity.
The Athenians told Sparta “What is practical and desired by the powerful
is moral. The powerful extract what they can and the weak grant what
they must.”
The Athenians only had to demonstrate that Sparta’s surrender was the
only option. Therefore, it would be the correct and proper decision. The
Prime Minster would have served us better if he admitted the
Thucydidean option that was available to us after all the politicking
about China and our overwhelming national debt.
The NYT story unfolds a subplot that is incidental to the main thesis on
coughing up a port. That seems to have irked the former President. It
should not. It does not speak about any wrong-doing or offence
committed. Sri Lanka does not have laws guiding Campaign financing as in
the United States.
The article states that during Sri Lankan elections in 2015, “large
payments from the Chinese port construction fund flowed directly to
campaign aides and activities for Mr. Rajapaksa and that these payments
“were confirmed by documents and cash checks detailed in a government
investigation” seen by The New York Times. She does not claim that she
alone saw the documentary evidence.
She is explicit in her assertion that the newspaper has seen the
evidence. The New York Times once defied the President and the Executive
branch in the US by publishing the ‘Pentagon papers’, an action that
was upheld by the US Supreme Court in an unprecedented unanimous
decision that became a landmark precedent in democracies worldwide.
Obviously, brother Gotabaya has missed out and brother Basil has learnt
about a free press.
The article states that “At least $7.6 million was dispensed from China
Harbor’s account at Standard Chartered Bank to affiliates of Mr.
Rajapaksa’s campaign, according to a document, seen by The Times, from
an active internal government investigation.
“The document details China Harbor’s bank account number — ownership of
which was verified — and intelligence gleaned from questioning of the
people to whom the cheques were made out.
Most of the payments were from a subaccount controlled by China Harbor,
named “HPDP Phase 2,” shorthand for Hambantota Port Development Project.
China Harbor has paid out. The people who received are known to the New
York Times. The Editors have told the former President that they are
willing to clarify and explain. Who knows? It is possible that the New
York Times is wrong. Our liberator could take the New York Times to the
dry cleaners in a US court for slander and defamation. He could do
better than his brother at the Mount Lavinia District Court against The
Sunday Leader.