Re-setting foreign policy: security, economics and human rights

Dr Sarala Fernando-January 4, 2020, 4:09 pm

 Lanka is at a crossroads with regard to foreign policy-making viz the re-setting of the three foundation pillars: security, economics and human rights. The Yahapalanaya government chose to focus on economics and human rights which helped open doors in Western capitals and led to the restoration of the EUGSP +concession which boosted flagging exports to that leading market; state invitations from these capitals poured in and there were many inward delegations to promote trade, investment and cooperation.

However, we are now living in a new era where the unequal distribution of benefits under globalization has lead to rising nationalism and manifestations of social discontent everywhere while the menace of violent extremism emanating from the chaos in the Middle East is spreading the contagion of ISIS around the globe and into Sri Lanka. The April 21 attacks in Sri Lanka pushed the public focus back on security and marked the results of the Presidential election with the consolidation of the majority community vote around Gotabahya Rajapaksa turning back from the previous strategy of reconciliation on the basis of power sharing between the majority-minority communities. Instead the government will now return the focus to security- led development while the pursuit of national security will include, inter alia, protecting of the war heroes from prosecution and ending cooperation with the international community on transitional justice issues symbolized by the HRC resolution 30/1.

As for the new foreign policy, some of the initial pronouncements of President Gotabhaya appear to reject the conventional theoretical notions of small state- big neighbour relations as confined to strategies of "balancing" and "bandwagonning", preferring instead the term of "neutrality". Neutrality is equated with avoiding being dragging into big power conflicts within a "strong" state exercising sovereignty over its strategic assets like ports. How does the term " neutrality " relate to the concept of "non-alignment" which arose in the specific context of the Cold War? SWRD Bandaranaike’s explanation in Parliament of his understanding of Non-Alignment Policy is worth quoting-‘first not to align with any power bloc during Cold war, gain the right to criticize the behavior of any country even though they are our friends, and secondly remain neutral in war and always try to gain a respective and peaceful solution.’

Can a small state successfully practice neutrality in an era when a new Cold War is gathering in the Indo-Pacific area with the competition between the US and China? Much will depend on the centre pillar of Sri Lanka foreign policy -, its relationship with India. Sri Lanka and India have traditionally enjoyed a special relationship in the region which was visible during the early years of common adherence to non-alignment and derived from the close friendship between the families of their leaders holding similar world views. However this time around, India is in a strategic security partnership with the US, together with like minded countries including Japan, Australia in their vision of a Free and Open Indian Ocean – so how will Sri Lanka now reiterating its wish to return to a Non Aligned foreign policy, relate to the Quad initiative which is a direct counter to the Chinese BRI in the Indian Ocean? Real politics has already intervened since the government’s stated intention of re-negotiating the Hambantota port deal with China has been resisted by the Chinese side and has had to be abandoned. This is hardly surprising since even developed countries have found neutrality hard to achieve in practice, recalling for example how Sweden for all its aspirations was unable to prevent the Nazi armies marching through their territory to occupy Norway in World War 11.

Of more immediate concern, a key question is how the government can, within this vision of neutrality, finesse the existing commitments on human rights to the international community and withdraw from an intrusive HRC resolution which has involved over a decade of continuous review and monitoring of reconciliation and transitional justice issues after the end of the armed conflict. Most Sri Lankans feel this scrutiny is unwarranted given the much worse human rights crises around the world and also since Sri Lanka has made good progress on reconciliation issues which any visitor to this country can see at first hand in traveling to the previously conflict-affected areas now rebuilt and teeming with commercial activity and free movement. However international opinion, no doubt influenced by the Tamil diaspora factor, continues to press for reconciliation as seen in the public Indian statements following Foreign Minister Jaishankar’s visit to Colombo which called for Sri Lanka to ‘boost reconciliation’ and this has been followed by similar statements from the EU, US and UK.

The recent bold move of rescinding constitutional provision 307 on Jammu and Kashmir by the Indian government has given hope to some "kite flying" in the local press suggesting a similar move in Sri Lanka on the 13th Amendment and abolition of the Provincial Councils. However, any change in the traditional Indian reiteration of support to 13 A is unlikely, given the Tamil Nadu interest. One should not forget also the Central Government national security interest in the letters of exchange attached to the India-Sri Lanka Agreeement of 1987 establishing redlines in respect of Sri Lanka’s use of its ports and harbours and acceptance of assistance from foreign governments affecting India’s security.

For all these reasons, it is best to abandon the myth of abolition of 13 A, and resort to a more practical approach, to canvass Indian assistance with regard to the new Sri Lanka policy direction on resolutin 30/1. With India’s own experience of UNHRC interference over the abrogation of Article 370 there is hope that India will help to remove the "internationalization" of the Sri Lanka issue and support a stand that this is an "internal" matter. However, the support India can give will depend on its assessment of the ground reality and political situation in a restive Tamil Nadu already up in arms against the government over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). The best that Sri Lanka can hope for is Indian support to Sri Lanka at the March HRC informal consultations with other delegations in Geneva where some announcement would have to be made of the new mandate given to the government at the recent elections towards eventual withdrawal of the resolution on Sri Lanka.

The key instrument would be the policy statement made by the leader of the Sri Lanka delegation which could include many supporting arguments outlining the progress made by Sri Lanka, restoring political rights and development in the conflict affected areas, having received a number of Special Rapporteurs every year, reported comprehensively to the UPR, set up the OMP as an independent body and displayed remarkable progress on reconciliation issues such as rehabilitating LTTE combatants and de-mining areas and releasing lands to permit re-settlement of residents. Asian group support to Sri Lanka will be crucial in this new strategy at the HRC and needs to be lobbied early and carefully with capitals.

However, what is most important, if we are to fully implement a friendship- with- all foreign policy, is that that our withdrawal from 30/1 must be made without antagonizing our Western partners . It is a diplomatic campaign which is required, mercifully led by professionals if we are to read between the lines of the recent public pronouncements by the new government. One other component needs to be included in the diplomatic campaign and that is the decision to put forward Sri Lanka’s candidature for election at the HRC which needs to be led from New York with negotiations within the Asian Group.

It is membership in the HRC which confers the power to propose resolutions, negotiate with voting member states, exchange reciprocal voting arrangements etc and it is ultimately the best "watch" over our interests. Ever since we took a confrontational path at the HRC, Sri Lanka has not been able to win election to the HRC. Compare this result with the fact that right through the years of the armed conflict we were able to win reelection to the CHR and its successor HRC, thanks to our record of active cooperation with the UN and international community and the diplomatic manner in which Foreign Ministry professionals in Geneva succeeded in ensuring there was no resolution or even mention of Sri Lanka on the official records of the HRC.

Many have commented on the need for Sri Lanka to take stock of the domestic situation and improve the protection systems at home so as to avoid foreign interference. There is a crying need at this time to take a balanced approach to human rights in the present climate where various lobby groups and interested parties are criticizing Western governments and associated NGOO for using human rights as a tool to put pressure on developing countries. In this climate we should draw on the strengths of the National Human Rights Commission which is an internationally recognized independent institution led by a courageous and respected professional. There is no doubt that the West uses human rights for political purposes viz. the much touted conditionality attached to aid and trade. With large influential Tamil diaspora communities in major Western countries , there will continue to be political demands upon Sri Lanka in terms of Tamil rights; however Sri Lanka had found valuable common ground on security issues with these same Western partners in intelligence cooperation, arrest of illegal arms and legal measures against financing of terrorism .

Moreover human rights has a universal application to which Sri Lanka has long subscribed throughout its independent history, both political and economic rights including the commitment to democracy and regular elections, the oldest universal suffrage in Asia, as well as universal human development through free health and education, labour rights, gender empowerment etc. In the island’s Buddhist heritage, humans and animals are one in the natural world, as reflected in Buddhist parables and stories, legends and paintings and the protection of the environment is extolled, as a heritage for future generations. Central to this vision is the notion of compassion and kindness towards all living beings especially animals who are in our charge. If we are to remain true to this philosophy Sri Lankan should be in the forefront of the climate change debate and finding solutions for pressing national problems like deforestation and protection of lands, clean air and clean water not to mention the horrors of the elephant-human conflict which is giving this country such a bad image abroad of human cruelty to those endangered creatures.

The problem is that in today’s world of instant communications, a single image or story about the plight of victims of violence can be sent around the world in minutes affecting how that country is seen abroad and its attractiveness for tourism and investment. In particular, violence against women and children is in the spotlight today from countries as different as France to India, which is why the government needs to be aware of the sensitivity of the incident of the Swiss embassy local staffer. It is best to leave the Foreign Ministry to deal with the Swiss Embassy in terms of our legal obligations under international conventions which conditions the grant of facilities, privileges and immunities to nationals of the receiving state only in respect of official consular duties while requiring the receiving State to exercise its jurisdiction over those persons in such a way as not to hinder unduly the performance of the functions of the consular post. Such incidents involving allegations on the behavior of individuals (this includes also Brigadier Priyanka Fernando case or our peace keepers in Haiti) should be handled quietly without causing lasting damage to bilateral or multilateral relations.

Sri Lanka has the advantage of a solid reputation within the UN where it has consistently taken an active role in negotiating the major international conventions on human rights, signed most of them and regularly nominates candidates to sit on the various Committees that review the periodic reports under the conventions. It would be a step back to withdraw from this activism now especially as the strategy of quiet cooperation woven by the Foreign Ministry had in fact contributed to keeping the country safe from international sanction during the long years of the armed conflict.

These are some of the big questions facing Sri Lanka’s foreign policy and it is intrinsically linked to its defence objectives. Some day, after the elections are done next year, it would be good if the Foreign Ministry could take the lead to draft a national security strategy to be brought before parliament for a healthy debate in order to fashion a bi-partisan way forward, founded on the basic principles of equi-distance from all major powers, non-joining of military pacts, non stationing of foreign military bases etc. Such an endeavour will be valuable in that continuity and reliability are the hallmarks of a sound foreign policy for a small state in a strategic location, facing many security challenges both traditional and non traditional. Now that there is an intelligent Minister in place who has a keen interest in foreign affairs, with a professional team led by a Foreign Secretary with long experience in human rights and public communications, we could be hopeful of smart decisions.