Sri Lanka- India relations

From Indpaedia
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(2020)
(China- India- Sri Lanka relations)
Line 69: Line 69:
  
 
Moreover, Sirisena’s election as Sri Lanka president had also been seen as a “gain” for India because of the overt tilt of his predecessor and rival, Mahinda Rajapaksa, towards China.
 
Moreover, Sirisena’s election as Sri Lanka president had also been seen as a “gain” for India because of the overt tilt of his predecessor and rival, Mahinda Rajapaksa, towards China.
 +
 +
=United Nations/ UNHRC: India’s voting pattern=
 +
==War crimes and human rights: 2012, 13, 14, 21==
 +
[https://epaper.timesgroup.com/Olive/ODN/TimesOfIndia/shared/ShowArticle.aspx?doc=TOIDEL%2F2021%2F03%2F24&entity=Ar00302&sk=27CDC73A&mode=text  Sachin Parashar, March 24, 2021: ''The Times of India'']
 +
 +
Caught between the expectations of the Tamil community in the middle of an election season and the prospect of ceding strategic ground in the neighbourhood, India abstained from voting on a contentious resolution at the UNHRC that sought to fix responsibility for war crimes and human rights violations by Sri Lankan authorities.
 +
 +
While the government was under pressure from political parties in Tamil Nadu to support the resolution, as it has done in the past on at least two occasions, voting in favour would certainly have sent ties with Lanka into a tailspin given that China, Russia, Pakistan and even Bangladesh rejected the resolution.
 +
 +
In 2012 and 2013, India had voted in favour of similar resolutions at the council.
 +
 +
''' 11 vote against Lanka resolution '''
 +
 +
In 2014, though, India abstained from voting on a resolution calling for a probe into alleged war crimes.
 +
 +
The resolution — promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka — at the 46th session of the Council was adopted on Tuesday with 22 out of 47 member states voting in favour. India and 13 other countries, including Nepal, abstained while the remaining 11 voted against.
 +
 +
As it abstained from voting, India continued to maintain that its support for Sri Lanka’s territorial integrity and unity, as also an abiding commitment for aspirations of Lankan Tamils for equality, peace, justice and dignity, were not either-or choices.
 +
 +
“India’s approach to the question of human rights in Sri Lanka is guided by two fundamental considerations. One is our support to the Tamils of Sri Lanka for equality, justice, dignity and peace. The other is in ensuring the unity, stability and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. We have always believed that these two goals are mutually supportive and Sri Lanka’s progress is best assured by simultaneously addressing both objectives,’’ said Pawan Badhe, first secretary, permanent mission of India.
 +
 +
While it abstained from voting, India supported the call by the international community for Sri Lanka to fulfil its commitments on devolution of political authority, including through early holding of elections for provincial councils and to ensure that all provincial councils were able to operate effectively, in accordance with the 13th amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution.
 +
 +
At the same time, Badhe said India believed that the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should be in conformity with the mandate given by the relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly.
 +
 +
[[Category:Defence|S SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONSSRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS
 +
SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS]]
 +
[[Category:Foreign Relations|S SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONSSRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS
 +
SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS]]
 +
[[Category:India|S SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONSSRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS
 +
SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS]]
 +
[[Category:Sri Lanka|S SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONSSRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS
 +
SRI LANKA- INDIA RELATIONS]]
  
 
=2020=  
 
=2020=  

Revision as of 15:40, 30 March 2021

This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.



Contents

1987: India-Sri Lanka Accord (ISLA)

From the archives of The Times of India

ASHOK MEHTA

The India-Sri Lanka Accord (ISLA) was signed in 1987 by then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and President Junius Jayawardene to end the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka peacefully.

India willy-nilly became the guarantor for the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) disarming the LTTE in lieu of Sri Lanka devolving power to the minority Tamils.

Invited by Sri Lanka,IPKF became the instrument for implementing ISLA.Two and a half years after the accord,with 1200 soldiers lost and nearly 2500 wounded,the IPKF was unceremoniously withdrawn with ISLA in tatters.Then Tamil Nadu CM M Karunanidhi renamed the IPKF as ITKF Indian Tamil Killing Force.That is the residual public perception of Indias first out-of-area military intervention and coercive diplomacy. Three years ago,with Indias passive and active help,Sri Lanka finally disarmed the LTTE through a comprehensive military defeat but the ethnic question,the rationale for ISLA and IPKF,remains unresolved.In a letter written to the author after the military victory,a serving Sri Lanka army commander wrote: The work started by you has been finished by us. Lt Gen Hamilton Wanasinghe,the Sri Lanka artillery (SLA) chief during the IPKF days,had earlier written in a letter that were India to leave us alone,Sri Lanka would sort out the LTTE. Not without its inherent shortcomings,especially with one hand tied at the back,the IPKF was made the scapegoat for the failure of Indias coercive diplomacy.

New Delhi's decision to intervene in Sri Lanka was triggered by overarching strategic reasons: the presence of foreign military and intelligence agencies inimical to India;domestic politics in Tamil Nadu;the dangerous internal security situation likely to arise in south India from the Sri Lankan army operations against the LTTE;and generally not mentioned deflecting attention from the Bofors scam. The ISLA ceremony in Colombo was marked by the assault on Gandhi by a Sri Lankan sailor of the Honour Guard.Dissent within the United National Party government over ISLA was suppressed.Both Jayewardene and LTTE supremo Prabhakaran were inveigled into accepting the accord,though some claim it was the other way round.India was drawn into a trap to do Colombos dirty work. The ISLA was signed in great haste with India becoming not only the signatory but also its guarantor.President Jayewardene was strangely nominated CinC of IPKF which was dispatched with equal haste,lack of preparedness and abysmal intelligence.The flawed assessment claimed that the LTTE would surrender their arms whereas it waged a wellplanned insurgency which completely surprised the IPKF. Lacking forethought,a clear mandate,proper contingency planning,a decisive chain of command and an exit policy,the IPKF arrived with much fanfare in Jaffna.

Absence of a political consensus and popular support at home were to compound its problems.For example,no one had factored in that friend LTTE would turn foe and that elections in both countries in 1989 would result in change of governments.Conscientous objector,Ranasinghe Premadasa became president and soon did a deal with Prabhakaran to evict the IPKF.As CinC,he ordered it to withdraw or face the SLA. Despite these enormous hurdles,IPKF did a commendable job: prevented Eelam and the breakup of Sri Lanka,with India underwriting its sovereignty and territorial integrity;restored the democratic process and institutions in the Tamil north and east,illustrated by holding of three elections;maintained the merger of the north and east through ISLA enabled the 13th amendment and formation of the northeast provincial council which gave Tamils the first taste of self governance.And,most of all,while IPKF weakened the LTTE,it allowed the SLA to defeat the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna urban insurgency in the south.

The month-long conventional battle of Jaffna and the 20-month short counter-insurgency campaign produced tactical lessons for the Indian Army,especially from LTTEs brilliant use of IEDs which were responsible for 70% of IPKF casualties.The Indian government blundered over its political calculations on time and resources required to alter the behaviour of the LTTE.Lack of a cohesive policy at the apex level and inadequate coordination at the operational level robbed the IPKF of greater success in its mission.Unfortunately,the lessons of the expeditionary campaign,like previous military encounters,lie buried in government closets.

Protesting Buddhist monks outside the Indian high commission in Colombo have demonstrated Lankas prescient India policy: after the deal with Prabhakaran in 1989,their placards read IPKF go back;following the catastrophic defeat of SLA at Elephant Pass in 2000 it was IPKF come back.And during the military rout of the LTTE in 2009,IPKF stay out.Still,Sri Lanka has constructed a memorial to the IPKF in the heart of Colombo.India not doing the same is the ultimate ignominy for the IPKF.


Fishermen issue

November 2016: Joint Working Group

The Hindu, November 6, 2016

India, Sri Lanka set up Joint Working Group to address fishermen issue

India and Sri Lanka have agreed to set up a Joint Working Group on Fisheries (JWG) and a hotline between their Coast Guards to address the long-standing issue of fishermen from Tamil Nadu being arrested, the External Affairs Ministry said.

The decision, taken during talks between External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj and Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera in New Delhi, came three days after fishermen of both countries failed to reach an agreement on ending fishing in Sri Lankan waters by Indian fishermen.

Regular meetings planned

“The [Foreign] Ministers exchanged views on possible mechanisms to help find a permanent solution to the fishermen issues,” a statement issued here said. It was also decided that the JWG would meet every three months while the Ministers of Fisheries on both sides would meet every six months beginning January 2017 along with Coast Guard and Naval representatives to discuss the protracted issue.

However, the issue of their seized boats is unresolved, and has been an emotive issue in Tamil Nadu, with the State government writing to the Centre on several occasions to negotiate for their release.. “The issue of the release of detained fishing vessels will be discussed at the first JWG meeting,” the statement said.

Minister of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare Radha Mohan Singh, Sri Lankan Minister for Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development Mahinda Amaraweera, as well Minister of State for Road Transport, Highways & Shipping Pon Radhakrishnan and Sri Lankan MP M.A. Sumanthiran participated in the discussions.

China- India- Sri Lanka relations

Sri Lanka dropped Chinese co., in favour of Indian co./ 2018

Sri Lanka dumps Chinese co ahead of its PM’s India trip, October 19, 2018: The Times of India


₹3,580Cr Contract To Build Houses Will Now Go To Indian Firm

Sri Lanka has reversed a decision to award a $300million (approximately Rs 2,211 crore) housing deal to China in favour of a joint venture with an Indian company, the government said, ahead of a visit by the prime minister to its South Asian neighbour.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe will meet his counterpart PM Narendra Modi on Saturday in New Delhi for talks. The two countries have long-standing ties, partly because of cultural and ethnic links with Tamils, many of whom live in the island’s north and east.

In April, state-run China Railway Beijing Engineering Group Co Ltd had won a tender worth over $300 million to build 40,000 houses in Jaffna, with China’s Exim bank to provide funding. But the project was halted after residents demanded brick houses, saying they preferred their traditional type of dwelling instead of the concrete structures the Chinese firm had planned.

On Wednesday, government spokesman Rajitha Senaratne said the cabinet had approved a new proposal for 28,000 houses worth Rs 3,580 crore ($210 million) to be built by Indian firm ND Enterprises and two Sri Lankan firms in the north and east. The planned homes are part of a total requirement of 65,000, he added.

“The rest of the houses will be given to firms which are ready to build them at lower prices,” Senaratne said, adding that China could also be considered in future for the remaining housing projects.

In Beijing on Thursday, foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang told a news briefing China’s cooperation with Sri Lanka was derived from consultations on an equal footing and he hoped that cooperation would be viewed objectively.

India has built 44,000 houses in the country in the first phase of reconstruction after a 26-year-war with Tamil Tiger rebels, and plans to rebuild Palaly airport and Kankesanthurai harbour, both damaged in the conflict.

Moreover, Sirisena’s election as Sri Lanka president had also been seen as a “gain” for India because of the overt tilt of his predecessor and rival, Mahinda Rajapaksa, towards China.

United Nations/ UNHRC: India’s voting pattern

War crimes and human rights: 2012, 13, 14, 21

Sachin Parashar, March 24, 2021: The Times of India

Caught between the expectations of the Tamil community in the middle of an election season and the prospect of ceding strategic ground in the neighbourhood, India abstained from voting on a contentious resolution at the UNHRC that sought to fix responsibility for war crimes and human rights violations by Sri Lankan authorities.

While the government was under pressure from political parties in Tamil Nadu to support the resolution, as it has done in the past on at least two occasions, voting in favour would certainly have sent ties with Lanka into a tailspin given that China, Russia, Pakistan and even Bangladesh rejected the resolution.

In 2012 and 2013, India had voted in favour of similar resolutions at the council.

11 vote against Lanka resolution

In 2014, though, India abstained from voting on a resolution calling for a probe into alleged war crimes.

The resolution — promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka — at the 46th session of the Council was adopted on Tuesday with 22 out of 47 member states voting in favour. India and 13 other countries, including Nepal, abstained while the remaining 11 voted against.

As it abstained from voting, India continued to maintain that its support for Sri Lanka’s territorial integrity and unity, as also an abiding commitment for aspirations of Lankan Tamils for equality, peace, justice and dignity, were not either-or choices.

“India’s approach to the question of human rights in Sri Lanka is guided by two fundamental considerations. One is our support to the Tamils of Sri Lanka for equality, justice, dignity and peace. The other is in ensuring the unity, stability and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka. We have always believed that these two goals are mutually supportive and Sri Lanka’s progress is best assured by simultaneously addressing both objectives,’’ said Pawan Badhe, first secretary, permanent mission of India.

While it abstained from voting, India supported the call by the international community for Sri Lanka to fulfil its commitments on devolution of political authority, including through early holding of elections for provincial councils and to ensure that all provincial councils were able to operate effectively, in accordance with the 13th amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution.

At the same time, Badhe said India believed that the work of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights should be in conformity with the mandate given by the relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly.

2020

‘India first’ policy

Will have ‘India first’ policy, China port deal a mistake: Lanka, August 26, 2020: The Times of India


Sri Lanka wants to pursue a “neutral” foreign policy but will retain an “India First” approach in strategic and security matters, foreign secretary Jayanath Colombage has said.

Speaking to a Sri Lankan TV channel, Colombage said, “President (Gotabaya Rajapaksa) has stated that in terms of strategic security, we will follow an ‘India first’ policy. We cannot afford to be a strategic security threat to India and we don’t have to be. We need to benefit from India. The president has clearly said that you are our first priority as far as security is concerned but I have to deal with other players for economic prosperity.”

Along with pursuing a neutral foreign policy, Sri Lanka will protect India’s strategic interests, he added.

In his remarks, the foreign secretary, the first from the armed services, said the decision to give Hambantota port on a 99-year lease to China was a “mistake”.

Foreign minister S Jaishankar recently reached out to his counterpart Dinesh Gunawardane after the Rajapaksa team returned to government in a resounding victory.

The Rajapaksa government, given its history, has been seen as closer to China than to India, which gives the Indian government an opportunity to move the relationship.

The big issue that India would seek to resolve is the Eastern Container Terminal where a local protest has stalled the project. In their private conversations, Sri Lanka has assured India of protecting its interests, but this will have to be formalised, sources here said.

2021

SL scraps oil tanker deal; 2nd India pact nixed in 2021

February 18, 2021: The Times of India

Lanka scraps oil tanker deal; 2nd India pact nixed this year

Colombo:

Sri Lanka will reacquire 99 World War II-era oil storage tanks leased to Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) in the eastern port district of Trincomalee, energy minister Udaya Gammanpila announced on Wednesday. It is the second deal with India to be scrapped by Sri Lanka this year.

Last month, the Sri Lankan government scrapped the tri-lateral deal with India and Japan to develop the Colombo Port’s Eastern Container Terminal (ECT). Gammanpila said that talks with the Indian high commissioner in Colombo on this issue concluded last Sunday.

“I am happy to state that he was very flexible at the talks. He ignored the conditions mentioned in the agreement signed in 2017 in order to be helpful to us,” he said, referring to his discussions with high commissioner Gopal Baglay. “After WW II, these tanks were abandoned without being used. In 2003, they were leased to IOC. But we are happy to say Sri Lanka will soon have those tanks back,” the minister said. Sri Lanka in 2003 had leased out 99 oil tanks to IOC for 30 years for an annual payment of $100,000. PTI

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox
Translate