By Shirani ranasinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today

Three experiences – the 1987 Indian intervention, 2015 regime change operation and the Russian-Ukraine war has made the Sri Lanka Government extremely scared of India. Unfortunately, the time we managed a successful relationship with India, between 2005 and 2009, during the height of the war against terrorism, is almost forgotten. Therefore, we fail to draw lessons from that period and strategy employed to improve relations with our closest neighbour. Instead, we look at the most negative incidents and scare ourselves senseless. 

India’s national security 

Our state of fear was yet again highlighted by the comments made by our Foreign Minister
Ali Sabry to the Indian media, during his visit to India earlier this month. He said the bilateral relations with India is the most important relationship in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy because of the economic size, the neighbourhood, the kind of things we share with each other. 

Thus, he assured his Indian audience that while Sri Lanka would work with everyone, others would be disallowed from undermining ‘under the guise of anything’ India’s legitimate security or other interests – A neighbour who had been with us through thick and thin.”

It is a matter of grave concern that Minister Sabry is not a lone sheep. In 2020, the then Foreign Secretary Admiral Jayanath Colombage created quite a stir when he pronounced, during a one-to-one interview in the local media, that Sri Lanka’s top priority is India’s security. 

NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, too, said, at a recent interview, that while he is fond of China, our relations must be with India. To further his point, he referred to India’s justification for the 1987 intervention, which was that India’s national security is important to India. 

India has been consistently vociferous about their national security. This was the same justification made for aiding and abetting terrorism in Sri Lanka from the 1970s decade until 21.5.1991. India blamed Sri Lanka’s close ties with the US for the unprovoked aggression on a friendly neighbour. 

We heard this same justification when relations fell apart in 2014. This time the reason given was the partnership we have with China. Allowing two Chinese submarines to dock at the Colombo Port, during both their outgoing and returning trips, were declared a threat to Indian security.

The same declaration was repeated when the Chinese Yuan Wang 5 research and survey vessel made a scheduled stopover at the Hambantota Port in 2022. Declaring it to be a spy ship, India vehemently protested against its docking for replenishments. However, when pressed for specific concerns, India failed to furnish any, which left Sri Lanka without reason to refuse entry of this ship into the Sri Lankan harbour. 

Outwardly there had not been any signs of displeasure towards Sri Lanka from India. In fact, India had continued to support Sri Lanka through the ongoing economic crisis – including giving the assurances required by the IMF to proceed with the USD 2.9 billion bailout package. 

Yet, this has not stopped the Indian media from speculating on Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister’s visit. It is thought that this visit was an effort to reset relations with India after the controversy over the Chinese vessel. When questioned over the ‘fallout’, Minister Sabry said he
managed to talk through” with his Indian counterpart Dr. S.Jaishankar and Sri Lanka wants to ‘balance things’ to ensure peace. 

What about our national security?

National security is not only a priority to India – it is the utmost concern for all nations. Therefore, Sri Lanka’s top priority cannot be India’s security. It needs to be Sri Lanka’s security. To ensure Sri Lanka’s security, India’s security can be taken into consideration but only as a strategy. 

Whether as a strategy or as a priority, Sri Lanka has consistently pledged to uphold India’s security. We have communicated that our commitment would not be a passive one but an active one, as was underlined by Minister Sabry’s recent comments that Sri Lanka would disallow any other from undermining under the guise of anything” India’s legitimate security or other interests. 

This statement raises a number of pertinent questions. 

1. How far are we willing to go to ensure India’s legitimate security and other interests?

2. Has prioritising India’s security secured our security? 

3. Have the justifications put forth by India for destabilising our country politically and/or militarily reasonable and justifiable?

4. Has India’s tactics to pressurise/destabilise Sri Lanka worked in India’s favour? 

5. Is there another, better strategy/policy we can adapt that will benefit Sri Lanka and her relations with India? 

What is meant by India’s legitimate security and other interests?

Minister Sabry’s unspecified ‘other interests’ is a matter to take serious note. If India decides that it is in India’s interest that her neighbours, particularly small ones like Sri Lanka stays small in terms of parameters such as economy, military strength and capabilities, should Sri Lanka concede? 

These are not farfetched arguments. The opportunity to finance the construction of the Hambanthota Port was first offered to India. Despite repeated visits to India and numerous meetings with the Indian Government, the matter simply dragged on for half a year. 

India’s problem was not simply the cost of the project. According to Forbes, India’s fortunes as a global trading power have been dogged for years by a glaring anomaly:  30 per cent of the nation’s export and import of sea-based cargo must be transshipped via foreign hubs. The majority of the country’s ports are grossly inefficient and cannot accommodate state-of-the-art ocean-going vessels. This constraint on trade directly affects India’s economic growth prospects.” 

In this context, to allow the Hambanthota Port would have directly challenged the Sagarmala Port project that had been mooted since 2003. This project, estimated at USD 120 billion, envisages to maximise India’s vast coastline by setting up new mega ports, modernising India’s existing ports, developing 14 Coastal Economic Zones and Coastal Economic Units, enhancing port connectivity via road, rail, multi-modal logistics parks, pipelines and waterways and promoting coastal community development. This is to boost exports by USD 110 billion and generating around 10 million employment opportunities. 

India never articulated any of these concerns to Sri Lanka. Instead, without refusing to finance the Hambanthota Port project, by not giving a definite word, the project was dragged for six or so months. If we stayed in the mind-frame that we should not explore our options beyond the Indian sphere, the Hambanthota Port would still be only a concept paper. 

When Sri Lanka partnered with China to build the Colombo Port City, India protested. According to Professor Sudharshan Senevirathna, the then Sri Lankan High Commissioner to India, National Security Advisor to the Indian Government Ajit Doval had expressly protested against the project. Doval had told the then Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa that small countries such as Sri Lanka do not need such big projects. 

Yet, the Colombo Port City is our biggest foreign direct investment and holds much promise. Even though its infrastructure are still under construction, the Port City has a positive vibe and is attracting much attention. Its riding school, Ceylon Riding Club Port City and Beach Park cafe are already throbbing with activity. In the coming years, the Port City will offer a whole range of new experiences and employment opportunities for Sri Lanka. 

Therefore, Minister Sabry’s pledge to uphold India’s unspecified ‘other interests’ is not a matter to be overlooked. We cannot cannibalise our own economic growth to appease India. In December 2021, the Sri Lankan Government suspended the contract awarded to the Chinese firm, Sino Soar Hybrid Technology to install a hybrid renewable energy system on the islands off Jaffna’s coast – Delft, Nagadeepa and Analthivu due to ‘security concern’ from a third party. 

In effect, we have disallowed our own progress. Did we benefit from this move is the question before us. 

ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com

(The views and opinions expressed in this article are writer’s own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Ceylon Today)

BY Shivanthi Ranasinghe