{"id":112285,"date":"2021-03-03T17:37:24","date_gmt":"2021-03-04T00:37:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=112285"},"modified":"2021-04-02T17:23:46","modified_gmt":"2021-04-03T00:23:46","slug":"the-general-election-of-1956-part-7c","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2021\/03\/03\/the-general-election-of-1956-part-7c\/","title":{"rendered":"THE GENERAL ELECTION OF 1956 Part 7C"},"content":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

Revised 2.4.21<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\ntook firm decisions where international relations were concerned. This essay\nlooks at his handling of several important issues which arose in 1956.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ISRAEL<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\nrecognized Israel, though he had reservations. Bandaranaike told Parliament,\nthe position is that the previous Government had agreed to diplomatic\nrepresentation by Israel here, I presume, with the implication of our\nrepresentation there. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 When I assumed office the Israel Government,\nkept on pressing us to find out whether they could send their Representative\nhere as the previous Government had decided. The British High Commission as\npressing for it. Therefore I agreed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Besides the\npressure from the British side, there could have been other reasons for\nBandaranaike\u2019s decision to open diplomatic relations with Israel, said Bandu de\nSilva. India had already accorded diplomatic recognition. Israel was building\nup a socialist state. Its Kibbutz system even attracted the attention of the local\nleft leadership.   Israel had supported Ceylon\u2019s entry into the U.N. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike ordered\nthat diplomatic missions be exchanged and asked the Permanent Secretary to\nappoint H.A.J. Hulugalle, Ambassador to Rome to be concurrently accredited to\nTel Aviv. The Arab League issued a\nstrong protest and a threat to boycott Ceylon tea, so Bandaranaike stopped Hulugalle\nfrom proceeding to Tel Aviv.  I have laid\nit by, said Bandaranaike to Parliament.   Israel however had already opened its\ndiplomatic mission in Colombo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\nhad his own views on the creation of Israel. Personally, if you ask me, the\nmuch wiser course should have been, that these Jews, should have been absorbed\ninto those countries in which they were settled and of which they had become citizens,\nas citizens of those countries and treated fairly and justly so that they would\nhave been able to make their great contributions to the national lives of those\ncountries. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 However, the Balfour Declaration recognized\npublicly this sentimental claim of theirs to return to their homeland after\nnearly 2,000 years. At the same time, it must be remembered there are about a million\nArabs who are refugees, about a million of them, driven out of their homeland. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Now let us\nunderstand the position of the Arab countries too, what they feel about this\nJewish State established in a narrow, barren strip of land, containing roughly\nless than a million people, about a million and a half, supported by\ninternational Jewry with finance, with the political power wielded in those\ngreat countries where the people of their race are still filling important and\ndistinguished places, with brains, with industry, with money and most modern\nequipment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Arabs\nfeel that this Jewish State planted in this way in their midst would prove of\ngreat danger to their independence and their freedom because Israel is bound to\nexpand.  She just cannot help\nherself.  Circumstances will make necessary\nfor the present Israelites to expand what with the powers they have and their\nability, backed by all these international forces. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Jews feel\nthat this small country is not sufficient for them, for one and a half million\npeople. This makes the Arabs’ fear not unjustifiable that Israel would prove a\ngreat danger, if not now, at least 10 years hence or 20 years hence or 30 years\nhence. That is the Arab point of view which might be given due consideration.\nThe Israelites point of view is that they have no such intention. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I had the\npleasure, at the United Nations, of having a long talk with Mrs. Golda Meir, a\nvery charming and able lady.  She was then\nForeign Secretary of Israel. I told her, this is the position. But she said,\n” Oh, no. We can get on very peacefully if we are allowed to do so. We\nhave no such intentions “, and so on and so forth. Obviously, that is what\nthe Jews say when they get their head into the tent till the rest of the body\nin due course follows into the tent, if I may quote an Arab saying.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have the\nhighest regard for the Jews. They are very able, and all honor to them. But\nthis is the newly planted State of Israel. Of course, they were there over\n2,000 years ago, it is true, but they have not been there for the last 1,800\nyears at least. If we look at it in that\nway, I dread to think what would be the position of many countries in the world,\nconcluded Bandaranaike. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

1956 was an\neventual year   for the UN. There was the\nSuez Crisis, the invasion of Egypt by Israel, the invasion of Hungary by\nRussia, United States troops in Lebanon and British troops in Jordan. Sri\nLanka, under Bandaranaike, responded to each of these issues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SUEZ CRISIS<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In July 1956,\nEgypt nationalized the Suez Canal. UK and France invaded Egypt to take the\nCanal back. And Israel used the opportunity to invade Egypt and expand its\nterritory by annexing the Sinai. Sri Lanka played an active role in Suez\ncrisis. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

News of\nPresident Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal Company on July 26 1956\nreached S. W. R. D. immediately and he quickly saw the dangers of this act.\nFirst he discussed the matter with Nehru and suggested having a meeting of the\nColombo Powers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In August\n1956, UK called a conference of 24 countries to discuss the Suez issue in\nLondon. Sri Lanka was also invited.  UK wanted\nto see international control of the Canal. India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and USSR\nopposed this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike said\nthat Sri Lanka supported the right of Egypt to nationalize the canal   and opposed the invasion by Britain and France.\nBandaranaike told British Prime Minister Anthony Eden that there should be an unconditional\nwithdrawal from Egyptian territory of British, French and Israeli forces before\nany other question could have been taken up, even the question of the clearing\nof the Suez Canal, and that it was Sri Lanka\u2018s firm belief that delays in such\nwithdrawal would only result in the danger of widespread hostility. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

” Our\nattitude at the London Conference was to recognize the legality of the\nnationalization and its corollary, the right to control the Suez Canal, and to\nsuggest, as there were international interests also, that some convention\nshould be again signed on the lines of the Convention of Constantinople of 1888\npreserving those international rights and appointing some consultative\ncommittee which would consult the Egyptian Government in the operation of the\ncanal and, if any dispute arose, that that matter be referred to an impartial\nbody of arbitration, perhaps under the auspices of the United Nations.\nPresident Nasser is not opposed to that. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\nalso obtained an assurance from Britain that the bases in Trincomalee and Colombo\nwould not be used in the Suez crisis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri Lanka\u2018s\nstatement came to the attention of Egypt\u2019s Prime Minister Nasser. Nasser sent a\ncable to Bandaranaike in September 1956. It said:” Your Excellency, having\ngone through the records of the London Conference on the Suez Canal. I wish to\nexpress to Your Excellency the Egyptian peoples and my own appreciation of the\nwise and fair attitude of your delegation and its support of the right of Egypt\nto nationalize the Suez Canal Company and to safeguard its own independence and\ndignity. I avail myself of this opportunity to express to Your Excellency my\nhighest consideration. Gamal Abdel Nasser. Later Nasser invited Bandaranaike to\nvisit Egypt. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On my way to New\nYork for the UN sessions I spent one day in London where I had the opportunity\nof meeting the British Prime Minister, and certain other Ministers. I am much\nobliged particularly to Sir Anthony Eden for having given me an opportunity of\nexplaining to him our views. Not only ours but of the Asian Powers as well,\nreported Bandaranaike to Parliament. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

UN had an emergency special session of the United Nations General\nAssembly to discuss the Suez issue. On November 1st, 1956 Suez issue\ncame to the General Assembly for the first time. Sri Lanka got a chance to\nvoice her views on the subject. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\ninstructed Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative at the UN, R. S. S. Gunawardena\nto up hold Egypt’s rights to nationalize the Suez Canal Company   and to say that Ceylon\ndisapproved of the military invasion of UK, France and also the invasion of\nIsrael. Bandaranaike opposed Britain\u2019s\npolicy of phased withdrawals from Suez. SWRD\nhad instead suggested a conference of the users of Suez Canal. There were 11\nresolutions on Suez and Sri Lanka voted for all of them. Sri Lanka was the cosponsor of one resolution, the   Asian powers resolution on the Suez issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\nspoke with Egyptian Foreign Minister Fawzi. \u2018Dr. Fawzi made me understand that\nEgypt is always ready to discuss the matter.\u2019 Bandaranaike\nhad conferred with Eisenhower earlier and agreed with US policy on the matter. Sri Lanka supported the US position of\ndemanding a ceasefire and creation of a UN emergency force in Suez to keep the\nbelligerent apart. Sri Lanka stated\nthat it was prepared to send in a contingent of infantry for this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

On his way\nback from New York, Bandaranaike against stopped over in UK. I saw Mr. Selwyn\nLloyd and had an opportunity of explaining to the Ministers again, as a result\nof my conversations in America and Canada, that I was confirmed in my view that\nthey should unconditionally withdraw their forces from Egypt. I impressed upon British Ministers that they\nmust announce this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Selwyn Lloyd,\n  got at me the night before I left, I was at a\ndinner given by the High Commissioner. He wanted to see me, he was preparing\nhis speech for the following day in the House of Commons,-to find out what I really\nthought of their announcement. I said, ” Well, better late than never. You\nhave done right. Please withdraw your forces. Personally I think that is the\nonly thing to be done. “<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Back\nin Sri Lanka, SWRD spoke of the matter in Parliament. I think we\ncan take it that the danger, or any close danger of widespread war breaking\nout, has now receded into the distance. That does not mean that all the\nproblems are solved. There is the clearing of the Suez Canal which must be\ntaken up quickly in the interests of all of us, Egypt included. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The United\nNations has emerged with its prestige increased-there is no question about\nit-over this incident. Even the American President, Eisenhower himself, is\nsatisfied that they must work through the United Nations in the future to\nsecure the peace of the world. I hope the other great powers will also come to\nthat conclusion, and the United Nations will now come into its own, said\nBandaranaike in Parliament. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bandaranaike\u2019s\nefforts to resolve the Suez Crisis, pleased the Arab countries. UNGA appointed\nan advisory committee to guide the United Nations Emergency Force for\nSuez.(UNEF) Sri Lanka was nominated to this body by Iran and was unanimously\napproved.  This was an indication of the\nappreciation of Sri Lanka\u2019s   foreign\npolicy by other countries, said Nissanka. The other countries were Brazil,\nCanada,  Colombia, India, Norway, and\nPakistan, with the Secretary-General as chairman.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

HUNGARY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There was a\nrevolt in Hungary in 1956, and Russian troops entered in October 1956. Russia prevented\nthe matter from coming up in Security Council by using her veto. However,   US brought the matter before the General\nAssembly. Sri Lanka did not have diplomatic relations with Hungary or Russia at\nthe time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sri Lanka\nspoke against the invasion at UN General Assembly. Sri Lanka said whether it is\nRussian dictatorship in Hungary or Anglo French dictatorship in Suez, it is\nundesirable. Sri Lanka asked that Russian\nforces be withdrawn from Hungary and Hungary left free to work out her own destiny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

United\nNations General Assembly appointed a fact finding special committee on Hungary.\nSri Lanka was appointed to this committee, with Australia, Denmark, Tunisia and\nUruguay. Sri Lankan Representative R.\nS. S. Gunawardena was appointed a Secretary of this committee. The committee was not allowed to visit\nHungary. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this case,\nNissanka observed, Sri Lanka was reluctant to anger Russia. The Report of the\ncommittee on Hungary was very critical of Russia. Sri Lanka abstained from\nvoting, though it was member of the committee. Bandaranaike was slow to condemn\nthe execution of Imre Nagy, former Hungarian Prime Minister by Russia.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

LEBANON and\nJORDAN<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In August\n1958 US and UK invaded Lebanon and Jordan respectively. UN met to discuss the\nmatter.  Sri Lanka   condemned the invasion and wanted the forces\nwithdrawn. SL\nsupported a resolution moved by the USSR for the withdrawal of these troops  .This paved the way for the subsequent\nadoption by the UN of a  similar\nresolution, said VLB Mendis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have in my\nhands a resolution that has been tabled by the Soviet Union, by Mr. Andrei\nGromyko. This is the resolution they have tabled, I presume today, in the United\nNations Assembly, said Bandaranaike to Parliament.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 “The General Assembly, recognizing the\nnecessity of adopting urgent measures to ease tension in the Near and Middle\nEast area in the interests of preserving universal peace, recommends to the\nGovernments of the United States and Great Britain to withdraw their troops\nfrom the territory of Lebanon and Jordan without delay, instructs the United\nNations Secretary-General to reinforce the United Nations Observer Group in\nLebanon in accordance with the plan presented by the United Nations Observer\nGroup in Lebanon in its Second Report, and to send a group of observers to\nJordan with a view to supervise the withdrawal of American and British troops\nfrom Lebanon and Jordan and the situation along the frontier of these\ncountries. ” <\/p>\n\n\n\n

 These views, I am happy to say, correspond\nentirely with my own, and those are the very instructions that, two days ago\nover the telephone, I conveyed to Sir Claude Corea [our UN representative] in\nNew York. That is a sensible way of securing this withdrawal and, I am glad to\nsay, a proposal of that sort coming from the Soviet Union itself is likely to\nbe acceptable to the majority of the countries in the United Nations now said\nBandaranaike in Parliament. (concluded)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

KAMALIKA PIERIS Revised 2.4.21 Bandaranaike took firm decisions where international relations were concerned. This essay looks at his handling of several important issues which arose in 1956. ISRAEL Bandaranaike recognized Israel, though he had reservations. Bandaranaike told Parliament, the position is that the previous Government had agreed to diplomatic representation by Israel here, I presume, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[104],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-112285","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-kamalika-pieris"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112285","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=112285"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112285\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=112285"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=112285"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=112285"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}