JRJ’s racism, cold war posturing and the Indian debacle

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 395

Published

  2021/11/24

New biography:

In addition to his political biography of J R Jayewardene, Godage & Bros published last month another book of travel by Rajiva Wijesinha. Around and About the Mediterranean covers journeys over half a century to Southern Europe, Northern Africa, and the Levant from Jordan up to Turkey. It also includes travel to the Balkans, Yugoslavia in 1972 and then the separate countries of the former Yugoslavia in the last five years.

Bringing together the Classical and the Christian and the Islamic cultures of the region makes for a fascinating read for it shows the intermingling that has made the Mediterranean so productive of ideas as well as artefacts. In addition, the book shares with readers the sheer joy of travel, the wonders seen and the pleasure of strenuous exploring followed by relaxation in scenic surroundings. There are several colour pictures as well as black and white ones to illustrate each section.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

An opportunity to peruse Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha’s critical biography of Sri Lanka’s first executive President (not elected), titled ‘J.R. JAYEWARDENE’S RACISM, COLD WAR POSTURING AND THE INDIAN DEBACLE’, couldn’t have been received at a better time.

The country is in turmoil with a wave of protests, with farmers’ now leading the way over the SLPP government agricultural policy, a simmering dispute with China regarding a ship carrying allegedly contaminated carbonic fertiliser consignment entering Sri Lankan waters, unprecedented balance of payment crisis, and a deepening disagreement with SLPP constituents over a deal with the US company New Fortress Energy, as well as foreign policy issues.

Can Sri Lanka’s current predicament be blamed on the executive presidential system, failure on the part of Parliament and the judiciary – the three pillars on which the country’s political system is based? Academic, administrator and ex-lawmaker who had represented the utterly corrupt SLFP and UNP-led political groupings (2010-2015 in Parliament), Prof. Wijesinha has launched this devastating attack on the late UNP leader JRJ but, overall, the JRJ biography seemed an extremely harsh critique on the political setup he established. But, the irony is the author himself had been part of the two major political groupings after having performed an immensely valuable role as the Secretary General of the Secretariat for Coordinating Peace Process (SCOPP) in addition to being the Secretary to the Disaster Management and Human Rights Ministry.

The writer really appreciate an opportunity to review ‘J.R. JAYEWARDENE’S RACISM, COLD WAR POSTURING AND THE INDIAN DEBACLE’ against the backdrop of The Island celebrating its 40th anniversary at a time the country is experiencing an unprecedented financial crisis. Prof. Wijesinha has basically dealt with the period The Island and its sister paper, Divaina played a critically important role.

Before delving into Prof. Wijesinha’s quite useful analysis, it would be pertinent to mention that as a UPFA National List MP, the academic, in spite of strong opposition from a section of his Liberal Party, voted for the dictatorial 18th Amendment to the Constitution that was passed on Sept. 18, 2010. The 18th Amendment that had been brought in at the expense of the 17th, introduced during Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s tenure as the President, literally placed the executive, the legislature and the judiciary under the President’s thumb. The judiciary cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for protecting and nurturing the Constitution if/when the executive or Parliament violated the Constitution, or both did, simultaneously. The UPFA initiated impeachment proceedings, close on the heels of the Supreme Court having deemed actions taken against then CJ Shirani Bandaranayake constitutional. Bandaranayake was accused of financial impropriety and interfering in legal cases among other allegations- all of which she denied, but her husband was involved in some banking shenanigans and he was convicted.

Wijesinghe, as an MP, however abstained from backing the impeachment motion against then C J Bandaranayake in early January 2013. A year later, Prof. switched his allegiance to a high profile yahapalana political project, spearheaded by the late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera and Ven. Atureliye Rathana, MP (now NL MP of Ape Jana Bala Pakshaya) that facilitated the break-up of the powerful UPFA and the emergence of long standing SLFP General Secretary Maithripala Sirisena as the Opposition presidential candidate.

With Sirisena taking over as the President in January 2015, Prof. Wijesinha received appointment as State Minister of Higher Education. However, Prof. Wijesinha resigned on Feb 17, 2015 opposing the then Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe’s move to secure executive powers for himself as the Prime Minister. Prof. Wijesinha declared the move to gazette the 19th Amendment to the Constitution and transfer of executive powers to the Prime Minister was both ill-timed and a wrong decision, thus, he could no longer be a part of the yahapalana government.

Prof. Wijesinha alleged in Parliament the transfer of executive powers to the Prime Minister was extremely dangerous when one considered the way the UNP leader was conducting himself. Prof. Wijesinha certainly didn’t receive public appreciation for shifting of allegiances from various political alliances within a very short period, first to the short-lived Sirisena–Wickemesinghe combination, and then declare support for Sirisena, at the expense of Wickremesinghe, and finally ending up with those who he abandoned in 2014. Sirisena, who led the charge against the Rajapaksas, had ended up among the same group whom he accused earlier of planning to assassinate him.

Jeyaraj’s arrest in the wake of Indo-Lanka Accord

Prof. Wijesinha dealt with how the JRJ government arrested the then The Island journalist David Buell Sabapathy Jeyaraj over the reportage of the Indian Army offensive in the Jaffna peninsula. The former parliamentarian reproduced an apt section of Jeyaraj’s report that discussed the ground situation in the peninsula. Having joined The Island, in June 1987, the writer remembers the subsequent developments that paved the way for Jeyaraj to leave for the US. The versatile writer ended up in Canada. New Delhi continuously interfered with print media cov­erage of the violence in the Northern and Eastern parts where the Indian Peace Keeping Force waged a bloody campaign to tame the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) after it turned its wrath against them.

Once the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) sleuths visited The Island editorial to question Norman Palihawadana over his coverage of atrocities committed by the Indian Army in the Eastern theatre of operations. Jeyaraj left the country in Sept 1988, over a year after India ended its disastrous military mission here. The prolific writer for the first time returned to Sri Lanka in Oct 2013 – four years after the military eradicated the LTTE completely.

The section on the Provincial Council legislation, when examined with how JRJ handled the judiciary, is thought-provoking and is evidence the legislature lacks the strength to counter overwhelming executive (dictatorial) powers, regardless of opposition by some lawmakers. The resignation of the late much respected Gamani Jayasuriya over the passage of Provincial Council legislation is a case in point.

‘J.R. JAYEWARDENE’S RACISM, COLD WAR POSTURING AND THE INDIAN DEBACLE’ published by S. Godage and Brothers should be made available in the library of the Parliament .The author should consider getting the book translated to Sinhala and Tamil, too, for the benefit of lawmakers unable to make use of the JRJ biography. The writer brought the new book to the attention of the Chief Librarian of Parliament and the pivotal importance of making it available to the lawmakers, over the last weekend.

Prof. Wijesinha discussed how JRJ brazenly amended and manipulated the Constitution, suppressed internal dissent and if the dictator had his way he would have deprived Ranasinghe Premadasa of an opportunity to contest the 1989 presidential election. At the onset of his new book, Prof. Wijesinha pointed out how JRJ brought in his first amendment to the Constitution to subvert a judgment of the courts.

Corruption becomes way of life

Prof. Wijesinha boldly discussed the impact the absolutely corrupt political system in place as a result of deterioration of parliamentary norms is having on the country. The latest JRJ autobiography has contradicted those who published hagiographies of the former President. Prof. Wijesinha compared the late JRJ with Ranil Wickemesinghe whom he described as JRJ’s spiritual heir. Having referred to their strategies in dealing with Tamil speaking people, Prof. Wijesinha repeated his long standing claim of Wickremesinghe bribing SLMC leader Rauff Hakeem in 2014 to win over his support ahead of the 2015 presidential election. Wijesinha first made the accusation in a widely watched Sirasa ‘Pathikada’ programme anchored by the late Bandula Jayasekera, one-time presidential spokesman and the writer’s colleague at The Island editorial. Prof. Wijesinha says Muslim politicians continue to cross up and down, depending on what they are offered.

Prof. Wijesinha publicly alleged years before the launch of JRJ biography how the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption (CIABOC) sat on his complaint on the bribery accusation. The academic declared that the UNP received money to engineer a crossover of over a dozen People’s Alliance lawmakers in 2000 from businessman Nahil Wijesuriya.

Referring to the Rubber-Rice pact with China finalised in 1952 and the despicable role played by JRJ, Prof. Wiejsinha briefly examined the 99-year-old lease on the strategic Hambantota port in 2017. Prof. Wijesinha blamed the then President Sirisena, Premier Wickremesinghe and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrema for the Hambantota sell-out to varying degrees. The author quite rightly faulted an influential section of the media for continuously attacking the Rajapaksas for selling family silver to the Chinese whereas the UNP-led administration pushed through the deal.

The incumbent government has had no option but to accept the controversial Hambantota deal. Interestingly, the government is now under fire for giving into the US strategy to take over Sri Lanka’s energy security. The author of the JRJ biography may not agree with the writer, but the undeniable truth is all governments since the advent of UNP at the 1977 parliamentary election contributed to the deterioration of democracy and sovereignty. The 20th Amendment enacted in Oct 2020 with a 2/3 majority is a case in point. With the advent of the 20th Amendment, the much discussed abolition of the executive presidency or curbing of its powers will not be subject to discussion though some may make some statements opposed to the executive presidential system.

Perhaps Prof. Wijesinha should have discussed how Wickremesinghe received the premiership in January 2015 in the aftermath of Sirisena’s victory. JRJ’s political strategy has been exploited by interested parties to deceive the public that victory at the presidential election provided a mandate for them to take over the government. Sirisena and Wickremesinghe did exactly that. If not for the manipulation of the system, Wickremesinghe wouldn’t have received the premiership in January 2015. Prof. Wijesinha wouldn’t have to resign in Feb 2015 and Treasury bond scams would not have been perpetrated.

JRJ biography in three parts

The civil society, the diplomatic community, the media and the general public can benefit from Prof. Wijesinha’s incisive thinking. In part I, the author discussed (a) overview of JRJ’s political perspectives (b) Tamil parties (c) much amended Constitution (d) election and having ministers at his whim and fancy (e) 1982 Referendum. Basically, part 1 dealt with the building up of the colossal power base. Part 11 discussed (a) alienation of Tamils (b) riots after killing of 13 soldiers in Jaffna (c) slide towards concessions (d) Indian interventions and (e) Indian military deployment. This section was aptly titled ‘A slow but relentless decline.’

The final part titled ‘And the Fall’ dealt with (a) Indo-Lanka Accord (b) India’s war against the LTTE (c) elections and increasing violence and (d) a new President.

The writer found Chapter 5 that examined the 1982 Referendum meant to prolong the life of Parliament regardless of consequences. JRJ introduced the 4th Amendment which Prof. Wiejsinha described as the worst of the then UNP leader’s constitutional amendments that paved the way for his party to rule the country from 1977 to 1989. The JRJ strategy ruined the country. The second JVP inspired insurgency, India inspired Tamil terrorism and trade union disputes wrecked the country during this period. Prof. Wijesinha lucidly explained how the then Attorney General Siva Pasupathy, who subsequently threw his weight behind the LTTE and Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon reacted to the controversial move.

Prof. Wijesinha called Pasupathy an obsequious man who had no qualms in his ‘pernicious bidding’ and Samarakoon as JRJ’s handpicked man was truly forthright. Prof. Wijesinha coverage of the judiciary’s response to a despicable move to extend the life of Parliament provides an opportunity for those interested in contemporary history to understand how the executive, the legislature and the judiciary collectively caused irreparable damage to the democratic system.

The assassination of actor-turned politician Vijaya Kumaratunga in Feb 1988 should be examined taking into consideration Prof. Wijesinha’s comment on the UNP strategy meant to politically destroy the much loved man. Having had categorised Kumaratunga as a Naxalite, the UNP imprisoned him during the dubious 1982 Referendum campaign. Let me reproduce verbatim what Prof. Wijesinha stated on alleged Naxalite plot: “Gamini Dissanayake, who was then firmly under JR’s thumb, also got in on the act and claimed that ‘the leader of the Naxalites is Vijaya Kumaratunga’ and his assistant Chandrika. Meanwhile, The Sunday Times, which was then fully controlled by the government, with the easily intimidated Rita Sebastian as its editor, published a list of eight Naxalites, namely, in order (1) Vijaya Kumaratunga (2) Chandrika Kumaratunga (3) Ratnasiri Wickramanayake (4) Hector Kobbekaduwa (5) T.B. Illangaratne (6) K.P. Silva (General Secretary, Communist Party), (7) G.S.P. Ranaweera (Editor, Aththa) and (8) Jinadasa Niyathapala.

Prof. Wijesinha commented on the media, including the birth of the Upali Newspapers Limited (UNL) and the disappearance of its founder Upali Wijewardene in the wake of Ranasinghe Premadasa thwarting JRJ’s move to field the top entrepreneur to contest the Kalawana electorate. The UNL received Prof. Wijesinha’s appreciation for opposing the Referendum, though mildly, whereas the state-owned media and Dawasa Group threw their full weight behind JRJ’s despicable move. The government engaged in violence in support of its political project. The author discussed how JRJ unashamedly used sections of the media and selected journalists for the project that gave his party the opportunity to govern the country for a period of 13 years, sans parliamentary elections.

A bizarre strategy

Prof. Wijesinha explained how JRJ adopted bizarre political strategies. Having undated letters of resignation from his MPs is one such shameful tactic. JRJ played politics with the system to restrict the number of by elections (remember, this was before the introduction of the PR system in 1989). The section titled ‘Flexing muscles in 1983’ under Chapter 5: Referendum underscored how JRJ consolidated unbridled power at the expense of Parliament and the Judiciary. JRJ ruined institutions at will. Parliament was among them. During a recent interview on ‘Siyatha’ , one-time President Maithripala Sirisena explained how successive Presidents brought in Amendments to consolidate their power at the expense of the people. Sirisena, quite rightly claimed that he was the only President to give up power by way of introducing the 19th Amendment to the Constitution in 2015. However, the irony is Sirisena, in his capacity as the SLFP leader, allowed his parliamentary group to vote for the 20th Amendment that neutralised the 19th. Lawmaker Sirisena quite conveniently refrained from voting for the 20th Amendment having explained his predicament to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Having accused the Rajapaksas of planning to bury him, Sirisena, who has been named in the Easter Sunday Commission report for possible prosecution for dereliction of duty, ended up as an SLPP lawmaker.

Fresh look at CFA, ect., finalised by UNP

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 394

Published

  2021/11/17

Jon Westburg the then Norwegian Ambassador in Colombo, shaking hands with Ranil Wickramasinghe after signing the CFA on Feb. 22, 2002.

Ranil declares US energy deal illegal

By Shamindra Ferdinando

UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, over the last weekend, declared the much disputed Framework Agreement (FA) with the US Company New Fortress Energy illegal.

 National List MP Wickremesinghe, who had served as the Prime Minister on several occasions emphasised: “any agreement that violated the country’s laws is illegal. This agreement has violated the laws of the country. Therefore, it is illegal.

Raising a privilege issue in Parliament the day after Basil Rajapaksa, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, delivered the Budget for 2022, Wickremesinghe explained that the FA violated the Provisions of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act and its Standing Orders.

 The UNP Leader urged Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to declare that the FA had violated the powers, privileges and immunity of Parliament.

Lawmaker Wickremesinghe’s declaration should be examined taking into consideration his conduct as the Premier during the 2001-2004 and 2015-2019 periods.

Did Wickremesinghe, in his capacity as the Premier, follow the advice he gave the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) in respect of the FA with the company listed in the NASDAQ? Did Wickremesinghe consult Parliament or the Cabinet of Ministers before finalising contentious agreements, like the CFA that he signed with the LTTE, in total secrecy, or the treacherous motion moved against one’s own country in Geneva? Wickremesinghe, during his premiership never bothered, to consult Parliament or discuss the issues at hand with relevant stakeholders.

Perhaps, Wickremesinghe felt that his party can exploit the growing crisis over the FA with the US enterprise. Having being reduced to just one National List slot in the Parliament, following the 2020 parliamentary election, the beleaguered UNP leader will simply do anything to gain some political mileage. Wickremesinghe’s stand on this matter should be examined against the backdrop of a section of the government, led by three Cabinet Ministers, namely Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wimal Weerawansa and Udaya Gammanpila, declaring the deal inimical to the country.

Let me discuss the Norway, arranged Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) on Feb 21, 2002. The then Premier disregarded Parliament. The UNP leader didn’t bother to properly consult the armed forces top brass. Their concerns weren’t heeded. Instead, Norway prepared the CFA, taking into consideration the LTTE’s concerns. The one-sided agreement facilitated the LTTE’s despicable project. The LTTE swiftly moved into armed forces held areas, where the group violated the CFA at will. In fact, the CFA facilitated the despicable terror project.

Wickremesinghe gave the go ahead for the 99-year-lease on the strategic Hambantota harbour in 2017 under controversial circumstances. Did Wickremesinghe consult Parliament before co-sponsoring an accountability resolution at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) or entering into ‘Comprehensive Partnership’ agreement with Japan, both in Oct 2015?

Former ministers, Mahinda Samarasinghe (now Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington), Dayasiri Jayasekera (State Minister) and Sarath Fonseka (MP) in response to queries raised by the writer acknowledged that the Cabinet never formally approved co-sponsorship of the Geneva resolution. Wickremesinghe never contradicted what his ministers’ said.

It would be pertinent to mention that on the eve of the CFA, the Navy and the Sea Tigers fought two battles off Mullaithivu. The Sea Tigers triggered the battle by engaging two Fast Attack Craft (FACs) off Chalai. The Navy had to call in Katunayake-based jets in support of the units under attack off the northern coast. The UNP never considered the real threat posed by the LTTE. In fact, the top leadership slept as the LTTE flexed its muscles. The rapid build-up of firepower, within range of the strategic Trincomalee harbour, threatened to overwhelm the armed forces. The LTTE went to the extent of assassinating the then Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar on the night of August 12, 2005 at his heavily fortified Bullers Lane residence.

UNP strategy

 The UNP never took the then President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga into confidence. She was never properly briefed nor her consent obtained before Wickremesinghe signed the CFA. On behalf of the LTTE, the late Velupillai Prabhakaran signed the document prepared in Oslo. Prof. G.L. Peiris, the then top minister in Wickremesinghe’s administration, declared President Kumaratunga skipped Cabinet on two consecutive sittings just before the signing of the CFA therefore she couldn’t receive briefing as regards the provisions of the CFA. Wickremesinghe secured Cabinet approval on Feb. 20, 2002. However, Presidential Spokesman the late Janadasa Peiris, declared the President didn’t attend the Cabinet meet on Feb 20 as she was told that nothing significant was going to take place (Kept away ‘as nothing important was to be discussed’-The Island, March 1, 2002).

Prof. Peiris led the government peace negotiating team, whereas the late Anton Balasingham, a British national of Sri Lankan origin, managed the LTTE team. The talks collapsed in April 2003 after six rounds, at overseas venues, as the LTTE abruptly quit the negotiating table as part of its overall strategy as it launched an unprecedented initiative to build up a formidable political base.

In line with that strategy, a coalition of Tamil political parties, called Tamil National Alliance (TNA) recognised the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people. The TNA remained committed to the LTTE’s separatist project until the very end.

Now that MP Wickremesinghe has declared that the New Fortress Energy deal violated the Provisions of the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act and its Standing Orders, wouldn’t it be interesting to examine how Wickremesinghe finalised the CFA.

Dr. John Gooneratne, who had been with the government Peace Secretariat, from its inception in January 2002 to May 2006, explained serious shortcomings in the CFA over a year after the conclusion of the conflict in May 2009. Appearing before the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) on Sept. 15, 2010, Dr. Gooneratne revealed that four key matters, proposed by the government, weren’t included in the CFA. (A) There had been no reference to the requirement to use the CFA to pave the way for talks to find a negotiated settlement. (B) Specific reference to the prohibition of unlawful importation of arms, ammunition and equipment was not included. (C) Although the LTTE was allowed to engage in ‘political work’ in government controlled areas, other political parties weren’t given access to areas under the LTTE control (D) Forcible conscription of personnel to the LTTE’s fighting cadre was also not added to the list of prohibited activities.

Dr. Gooneratne, a veteran career diplomat, faulted the then UNP government as well as the Norwegians for being hasty in their approach. Dr. Gooneratne said: “What lessons can we learn from this experience? Firstly, negotiating on such security and military matters should have been a more inclusive format than by just the party in power. Secondly, in negotiating documents such as the CFA, thoroughness should be the standard, and not just the speed.”

One-time Norwegian peace envoy to the Sri Lankan peace process, Erik Solheim claimed that he drafted the CFA, signed by Wickremesinghe and Prabhakaran. Solheim said so in an interview with Dr. Kumar Rupesinghe, one of the beneficiaries of the Norwegian project (Negotiating Peace in Sri Lanka: Efforts, Failures and Lessons – Volume II edited by Dr. Rupesinghe – first published in February 2006).

Asked by Dr. Rupesinghe to explain the circumstances under which the CFA came into being, Solheim said that having had extensive discussions with LTTE theoretician, Anton Balasingham as well as ministers, G. L. Peiris (SLPP Chairman and Foreign Minister) and Milinda Moragoda (Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in New Delhi), he drafted a new proposal. That process had taken about two months. Prof. Peiris nor former Minister Moragoda had ever questioned Solheim’s assertions.

Need for proper negotiating mechanism

 During the yahapalana administration (2015-2019) the US negotiated ACSA (Access and Cross Servicing Agreement), SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) and MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) Compact with Sri Lanka. Did Wickremesinghe and then President Maithripala Sirisena consult Parliament, or the Cabinet of Ministers, regarding the three agreements?

 President Sirisena, in his capacity as the Defence Minister authorised the ACSA. The President had the tacit support of the UNP. The government never disclosed the finalisation of the ACSA until the writer raised the issue with President Sirisena at a media briefing held at the President’s House. Having repeatedly vowed not to allow the UNP to enter into agreements with the US, at the expense of the country’s national security, President Sirisena had no option but to admit his role in authorising ACSA.

The SLFP leader, now a member of the SLPP parliamentary group, quietly allowed the finalisation of the ACSA in early August 2017. The ACSA, first signed by the then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, during Mahinda Rajapakas’s first tenure as the President, received Sirisena’s approval, though he subsequently vowed any agreement, inimical to Sri Lanka, wouldn’t be allowed as long as he enjoyed executive powers. This declaration was made at a meeting with editors of national newspapers and senior representatives of both the print and electronic media. When the writer sought a clarification regarding the ACSA, Sirisena acknowledged the finalisation of the agreement, in the first week of August 2017. The UNP never found fault with Sirisena for giving the go ahead for the ACSA finalisation. As far as the yahapalana policy, vis-à-vis the US, both Sirisena and Wickremesinghe took one stand though sometimes, Sirisena tried to distance himself from Wickremesinghe’s Geneva policy.

When Sri Lanka entered into ACSA way back in 2007, the first Rajapaksa administration didn’t bother to consult the government parliamentary group or Parliament.

Talks on SOFA were suspended later. But the possibility of the US taking it up can never be ruled out whereas Sri Lanka abandoned the MCC project on the recommendations made by the Gunaruwan Committee.

Lanka-Singapore trade agreement

 Controversy surrounds the circumstances in which the yahapalana administration entered into the Sri Lanka – Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA) on Jan. 23 2018. The agreement was brought into operation with effect from 1 May 2018. Sirisena who had been present at the signing of the agreement in Colombo, declared in Dec of the same year that it was rushed without proper consent of stakeholders. Sirisena said so after receiving a report prepared by retired economics Professor W.D. Lakshman, who studied the agreement. The UNP and the SLFP should be ashamed of the way they handled trade negotiations with Singapore where disgraced Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran secured refuge in early 2018. Professor Lakshman succeeded Mahendran’s successor Dr. Indrajith Coomaraswamy soon after the 2019 presidential poll. Did the yahapalana leaders consult cabinet of ministers or Parliament as regards SLSFTA?

 UNP MP Wickremesinghe owes the country an explanation as to how SLSFTA came into being. Did MP Wickremesinghe follow the advice he recently gave the SLPP in respect of the New Fortress Energy deal?

Successive governments have been utterly irresponsible in finalising key agreements with foreign governments. There cannot be a better example than the deal on the Hambantota port. One-time Ports and Shipping Minister Arjuna Ranatunga recently discussed the failure on the part of the country to adopt a common stand in matters of national importance. Ranatunga said so when the writer sought his opinion on the controversy over the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill enacted in last Oct and the 99-year leasing of the Hambantota port to the Chinese.

Ranatunga compared the handing over of the Hambantota port to China, in July 2017, with the Colombo Port City project to be managed in terms of the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Act.

The former lawmaker said that he gave up the Ports and Shipping Ministry as he didn’t want to endorse the disputed agreement under any circumstances.

Ranatunga contested the Gampaha district, on the UNP ticket, at the last general election, but couldn’t win like all other party candidates, barring for a solitary National List seat, which Wickremesinghe grabbed though it should have rightfully gone to John Amaratunga, who was on top of the party’s National List or at least to one of those National List nominees.

 Ranatunga pointed out that the Port City Project, too, had been under the purview of the ports and shipping ministry. But the yahapalana administration, following consultations with him, brought the Port City project under the then Megapolis Minister Patali Champika Ranawaka’s purview.

Ranatunga was replaced as Ports and Shipping Minister by SLFP Vice President and Kalutara District MP Mahinda Samarasinghe.

The former World Cup winning national cricket captain emphasised that he gave up the ministry after the yahapalana government rejected a proposal prepared in consultation with the ministry and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA). It was discarded by those bent on pursuing an agenda inimical to Sri Lanka, he charged.

The then SLFPer Samarasinghe finalised the agreement on July 29, 2017.

Former minister Ranatunga said that he was quite surprised by the rejection of his proposal as he presented a sensible solution which addressed concerns of both countries. Ranatunga said that he didn’t want to remain as the Ports and Shipping Minister at any cost.

Acknowledging some support provided by the then Cabinet colleague Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse PC, as he struggled to thwart a plan inimical to the country, Ranatunga claimed that the Joint Opposition (SLPP now) backed the deal on the Hambantota port. Ranatunga pointed out that some tend to conveniently forget both the Hambantota and Port City projects were initiated during the previous Rajapaksa administration.

The Hambantota port project was initiated in 2007 at the height of the war, whereas the Port City got underway in late 2014.

Appreciating the investments made by China in Sri Lanka, over a period of time, Ranatunga stressed that the country couldn’t afford to enter into agreements detrimental to its interests. The former minister urged lawmakers, both opposed to the project as well as those backing, it to be cautious in their approach.

 Noting that the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) had been among those who petitioned the Supreme Court against the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill, Ranatunga said that the handling of the Hambantota port agreement revealed how the country was being manipulated. “In spite of the Hambantota port coming under the purview of the Ports and Shipping Ministry, it didn’t really have a say. That is the undeniable truth,” Ranatunga said.

The former MP questioned the rationale in reclaiming land adjacent to the Galle Face Green at such a huge cost as the project could have been set up in some other suitable location.

Ranatunga said that he was not aware of the current status of the cases filed against the Hambantota port. Among those who filed cases was the then MP Vavudeva Nanayakkara. However, none of the 19 petitioners who moved the Supreme Court against the Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill, including BASL, conveniently failed to figure in the legal challenge thrown against the Hambantota port deal.

Ranatunga said due to the failure on the part of Parliament to take remedial measures the country seemed to be repeating mistakes. The former minister regretted the overall failure to address contentious issues, such as major foreign investment which might threaten the country’s stability. The government and the main Opposition should bear the responsibility for both Hambantota and Port City projects as they proceeded with both.

Visit to Moscow amid US travel ban

 SPECIAL REPORT : Part 393

Published

  2021/11/10

General Shavendra Silva and wife Sujeewa Nelson at the Mikhailovskaya Military Artillery School(pic courtesy Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation)

By Shamindra Ferdinando

General Shavendra Silva’s recently concluded visit (Oct 23 to Oct 30) to Russia should be examined against the backdrop of an unprecedented travel ban by the United States on the Sri Lanka Army Commander over hearsay war crimes accusations, including extrajudicial killings, during the last phase of the Vanni offensive.

Sri Lanka brought the war to a successful conclusion on the morning of May 19, 2009, on the banks of the Nanthikadal lagoon, despite a chorus of ‘expert’ opinion generated by the West over the years claiming that the country’s armed forces were incapable of defeating the LTTE and they had literally elevated the Tigers to a mythical and invincible status.

Combined Sri Lankan armed forces, however, conducted a relentless campaign, over a period of two years and 10 months, until Velupillai Prabhakaran was trapped in the one-time LTTE stronghold Mullaitivu. Prabhakaran was killed the day after the then General Sarath Fonseka’s Army declared the end of the war, on May 18, 2009. The Vijayabahu Infantry Regiment (VIR) was credited with the killing of Prabhakaran and recovery of his body more or less intact.

The US, one of the worst violators of human rights in many conflict zones, in the world, imposed a politically-motivated travel ban on General Silva, the first General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the much-celebrated 58 Division (formerly Task Force I).

Having launched offensive operations in early Sept 2007, from the Western front, the area popularly known as the Mannar rice bowl, the TF 1 troops fought their way northwards, captured Pooneryn (late Nov 2008) and then turned eastwards, crossed the Kandy-Jaffna A9 road, at Paranthan, and in quick succession stormed enemy defences at Elephant Pass and also brought Kilinochchi South under their control by early January 2009. With the fall of Kilinochchi, the Army stepped up offensive action leading to the final confrontation with Prabhakaran on May 19, 2009 in the environs of the Nanthikadal lagoon.

It must be noted here that Fonseka’s Army changed overall tactics in the northern and eastern theatres. The enemy simply had no answer to several fighting formations advancing on its bases and troops causing havoc, deep inside enemy held territory.

It would be pertinent to mention that the Army-raised TF 1 comprising two infantry Brigades on August 31, 2007, at Irattaperiyakulam camp under the leadership of the then Brigadier Chagie Gallage who carried out the first successful mission which resulted in the liberation of Silavathurai.

Earlier in April of that year, men Gallage led, captured the Thoppigala base of the Tigers, which some thought was impregnable. After its capture, ironically, then Opposition Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe tried to denigrate the victory as just the capture of a rock outcrop. We can recall that when Brig. Gallage went to announce the capture of the Tiger Jungle base at Toppigala he drove his own jeep like an ordinary soldier with a staff officer next to him also dressed like an ordinary soldier, but the media that had converged at his base close to the Black Bridge Batticaloa were not aware of the important if not symbolic achievement till it was announced over the TV and radio that night.In fact, Gallage spearheaded the Eastern campaign except the action at Mavilaru, conducted by the then Brigadier Prasanna Silva.

While TF 1 was steadily advancing from the Mannar Rice Bowl, Brig. Gallage suffered a heart attack in the Vanni west, Gallage had to undergo emergency surgery in Colombo. Fonseka brought in Shavendra Silva to command TF 1. The Army never revealed at that time military strategist Gallage suffered a heart attack on Oct 22, 2007, the day the LTTE mounted a commando-style raid on the Anuradhapura air base. Because of the calamity at the air base, Gallage had to be taken by chopper to Sigiriya air base and then flown to Ratmalana air base in a fixed aircraft. The rest is history.

Army Chief blacklisted

The US blacklisted Gen. Silva close on the heels of Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces, General Oleg Salyukov’s five-day visit to Colombo in early Feb 2020 on the invitation of his Sri Lankan counterpart the then Lieutenant General Shavendra Silva. General Salyukov extended an invitation to General Silva to visit Russia though the eruption of Covid-19 epidemic prevented him from leaving the country as he was appointed as the head of the Task Force appointed to prevent the spread of the pandemic.

General Silva’s wife, Sujeewa Nelson accompanied him on his second foreign visit since the imposition of the US travel ban. Their first overseas visit was in March 2021 to Islamabad on the invitation of the country’s all-weather friend Pakistan. General Silva and Sujeewa Nelson were invitees at Pakistan’s national military parade. A section of the foreign media condemned and disputed Pakistan’s invitation to General Silva on the basis of him being among those accused of war crimes.

Having solidly defended Sri Lanka at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), both Pakistan and Russia have absolutely no qualms in inviting General Silva. Both countries voted against anti-Sri Lanka resolutions spearheaded by the West moved in Geneva.

The timing of the US ban underscored the Superpower’s intention to meddle in local politics. The announcement was made between the last presidential election held in mid-November 2019 and the parliamentary polls in August 2020. It would be pertinent to mention that the parliamentary polls, scheduled for April 25, 2020, had to be put off to August due to the Covid-19 eruption. The UNP suffered a very heavy defeat with the over 70 year-old party that had 106 MPs in Parliament (2015-2019) being reduced to a solitary National List slot.

Most probably the US never expected the then Maj. Gen. Silva to receive an opportunity to command the Sri Lanka Army. Had that happened, the US wouldn’t have had to blacklist the highly decorated soldier. Obviously, the UNP-led government and the then President Maithripala Sirisena didn’t agree on how to deal with Silva.

The failed constitutional coup in late Oct 2018 ruined the political relationship between President Sirisena and Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe. Therefore, no one would have been surprised by the yahapalana leaders’ disagreement on the Army Commander’s appointment.

President Sirisena appointed the distinguished ground combat commander as the 23rd Commander of the Army on August 18, 2019. Maj. Gen. Silva was also elevated to the rank of Lieutenant General effective the same date. Had efforts to deprive Silva of the top position succeeded, the US wouldn’t have had to play politics with the Sri Lankan military by imposing a controversial travel ban on him. Or had the Presidency been in the hands of the UNP it would have appointed one of its uniformed ‘yes’ men as the new Army Commander and definitely not one who helped to defeat the most ruthless terror outfit in the world.

Whatever the reasons, the stand taken by President Sirisena, the Commanding-in-Chief of the armed forces as well as the Defence Minister should be appreciated.

Following wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s triumph at the Nov 2019 presidential election, Silva was promoted to the rank of a 4-star General on Dec 28, 2020. With the retirement of Admiral Ravi Wijegunaratne on Dec 31, 2019, Gen. Silva was named the Chief of Defence Staff. Six weeks later the US categorised General Silva as a war criminal.

Denigration of an Army Chief

Why did the US categorise General Silva a war criminal well over a decade after the conclusion of the war? Let me remind the reader that Silva, in 2010, received the appointment as Deputy Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, in New York. Silva is the one and only serving military officer in Sri Lanka’s history to be promoted to an ‘Ambassadorial’ rank in the country’s Foreign Service. Most importantly, why on earth the US found it necessary to declare Silva a war criminal having backed the war-winning General Sarath Fonseka’s candidature at the 2010 January presidential election.

In fact, the US played a significant role in building up a UNP-led coalition that included the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in support of Fonseka. War crimes accusations against the Army seemed ridiculous against the backdrop of all predominantly Tamil speaking electoral districts in the North and the East voting overwhelmingly for Fonseka. But, incumbent President Mahinda Rajapaksa polled 1.8 mn votes more than Fonseka. The silly Opposition blamed Fonseka’s defeat on what the late JVP leader Somawansa Amarasinghe called a computer jilmart.

When the then government arrested Fonseka under controversial circumstances and was sentenced, the US intervened on the retired General’s behalf despite then US Ambassador Patricia Butenis having named Fonseka a war criminal along with the Rajapaksa brothers, Mahinda, Basil and Gotabaya. Butenis assertion is in the public domain thanks to secret Wiki Leaks. Butenis’ cable sent just weeks before the January 2010 presidential election underscored duplicitous US strategy.

Ten years after the 2010 presidential election, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tweeted: “I am designating Shavendra Silva making him ineligible for entry into the US due to his involvement in extrajudicial killings during Sri Lanka’s Civil War. The US will not waver in its pursuit of accountability for those who commit war crimes and violate human rights.”

Designation of the Army Chief took place soon after Pompeo declared the US looked forward to deepening ties with Sri Lanka. How did the US expect to improve ties by blacklisting a hugely popular Army Chief?

In a previous statement, Pompeo said that allegations of gross human rights violations against Shavendra Silva had been documented by the United Nations and other organisations. US sanctions barred both Silva and his immediate family members from entering the US.

 “The Government of Sri Lanka takes strong objection to the imposition of travel restrictions on Lieutenant General Silva and his immediate family members by the Government of the United States, based on independently unverified information,” the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Lanka responds to US

Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington Rodney Perera declared that the US decision hadn’t been based on independently verified information, but on the much-disputed OISL Report of 2015 and accusations propagated by various other organisations.

Ambassador Perera urged the US to verify the authenticity of its sources of information. Ambassador Perera said so addressing the American Foreign Service Association Club in Washington D.C. The gathering included several former U.S. Ambassadors and senior officials who served in Colombo.

Commenting on the inclusion of the family members of the Army Commander on the blacklist, Ambassador Perera declared: “Even though we are now in the 21st Century, even members of his family who have not been accused of any wrongdoing, have been subjected to a collective punishment reminiscent of the practice in medieval Europe.”

The career diplomat assured Sri Lanka would remain strongly engaged on this issue with the United States to have it review its decision. The assurance was given about a week after the US blacklisted the much decorated soldier. What have we done since then to disapprove unsubstantiated war crimes allegations against General Silva? In fact, the despicable project against the Commander of the Army is nothing but an affront to the country. Parliament never really took up the Western powers’ campaign against the war-winning military here. During Karu Jauasuriya’s tenure as the Speaker, the UNP politician never bothered to take it up with Western diplomats. One shouldn’t be surprised over that, as his party betrayed the military by co-sponsoring an accountability resolution on Oct.01, 2015. However, the failure on the part of incumbent Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to speak on behalf of the military when foreign diplomats called on him, cannot be justified.

Before General Silva undertook the visit to Russia, Chief of Indian Army Staff General Manoj Mukund Naravane was here. In spite of India being a US ally, New Delhi went ahead with its Army Chief’s visit to Colombo. Naravane had been here with the Indian Peace Keeping Force during its deployment in terms of the Indo-Lanka Accord and had been based in Trincomalee. Now, the issue is how is it that those countries demanding action against the Sri Lankan military for eradicating terrorism on its soil are silent on India’s accountability issues here. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka lacked the political will to present its case properly before the international community.

Failure on the part of successive Sri Lankan governments to address accountability issues since the end of the conflict has underscored utter irresponsibility on the country’s part. Against that pathetic background, the Russian invitation extended to Gen. Silva is of paramount importance.

 Considered to be one of the highest honours, presented in recent times, the formal and elegant Guard of Honour parade with four squads of the Russian Land Forces, together with a Russian Army band distinctively featured the significance and the recognition the Russian Land Forces attach to the visiting Sri Lankan Army Chief.

General Silva after formal honours was ushered to pay floral tribute to the monument at Alexandrovsky Garden of Moscow Kremlin where the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier stands.

During General Shavendra Silva’s stay in the Russian Federation, he visited the Moscow Higher Combined Arms Command School and met its Commandant, Major General Roman Binyukov, Division Commander of the 4th Guards Tank Division in Naro-Fominsk and the Commandant at Mikhailovskaya before he visited the Military Artillery Academy, Military Medical Academy and several other places of military and tourist attractions.

Saliyapura bombshell

The writer earlier mentioned the change of command of the TF 1 in Oct 2007 following Gallage’s predicament, but what is of far more importance is what he said at Saliyapura Gajaba Regimental headquarters in the first week of Sept 2018 as his farewell speech when he retired from the service after an illustrious military career, much of it having spent leading combat troops. Gajaba veteran General Gallage didn’t mince his words when he questioned how having served the Army for well over 30 years he was compelled to retire being categorised as a war criminal. Why did Gallage have to say that? Gallage had sought a visa in Sept 2016 to visit his brother living in Australia. He wanted to visit Australia from Dec. 2016 to January 2017. Gallage’s brother, an Australian citizen of Sri Lankan origin, had visited Colombo especially to make representations to the Australian HC.

Following that meeting the Australian department of Immigration and Border Protection issued a report titled ‘Potential Controversial Visitor’ citing war crimes and crimes against humanity as reasons for denying Gallage a visa.

In the absence of specific accusations against Gallage, Australia found fault with him for giving leadership to the 59 Division after the conclusion of the war. In other words, those who commanded fighting formations during the war (Divisions 58, 59, 57, 53, 55 et al) on the Vanni front and after can be humiliated. Gallage’s is a case in point.

Interestingly, the Army celebrated its 72 anniversary at the Saliyapura base last Oct with the participation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa formerly of the Gajaba Regiment. In his speech at Saliyapura, Rajapaksa, who retired having achieved Lieutenant Colonel’s rank (1971-1992), acknowledged shortcomings on the part of his government. The government should examine the aptness of its response to war crimes accusations. President Rajapaksa made reference on Nov 6 to Sri Lanka having to face Geneva accusations though in a different context.

Designation of the Army Chief should be examined taking into consideration overall war crimes accusations directed at Sri Lanka. How can the government forget the US declined to issue a visa to Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka and the circumstances?

 Haven’t those in authority observed how Canada and Italy rejected retired Air Force Commander Air Marshal Sumangala Dias as Sri Lanka’s top diplomatic envoy?

British Conservative politician Lord Naseby in an interview with this writer in late Sept 2019 questioned Sri Lanka’s response to the accountability issue (Naseby disappointed in Lanka’s collective failure to use ‘Gash reports’ for its defence-Sept 25, 2019, The Island.’

Why didn’t Sri Lanka continue to refrain from effectively using British cables that had been obtained by Lord Naseby after near a three-year legal battle and wartime US Defence Advisor Lt. Colonel Lawrence Smith’s taking a view 100 percent contrary to the US and its allies as regards the accountability issue, at the 2011 Colombo Defence seminar? Nothing can be as important as the US official’s statement exclusively reported by The Island as it was made just two months after the much debated highly controversial Darusman report’s release. The split in the war-winning team with Fonseka’s entry into politics in late 2009, too, also contributed to Sri Lanka’s overall failure. Instead of countering lies, the first Rajapaksa administration squandered millions of USD in foolish image building projects.

Sri Lanka’s relations with the world should be examined in the context of Quad strategies and new trilateral security partnership AUKUS under which Australia would get a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines for the first time and Sri Lanka’s strong partnership with China. The ongoing controversy over Sri Lanka moving the Colombo Commercial Court against top Chinese fertiliser company, its local agent and the People’s Bank to stop payment for carbonic fertiliser consignment shouldn’t be allowed to ruin relations between the two countries. Like Pakistan, the emerging world power China is an all-weather friend, whose continuing support to Colombo is essential. Therefore, the issue at hand should be dealt carefully taking into consideration all factors. But, under no circumstances, should corruption be allowed to undermine Lanka-China relations.