Bandaranaike Foreign Policy

Palitha SENANAYAKE

When Mrs. Bandaranaike constantly sought recourse to Bandaranaike policies in explaining the political philosophy of the SLFP led coalition from the 1970 to 77, I as a schoolboy with limited understanding in politics took such references as way of explaining the unexplainable in Government policies. Having hailed from a household with links to the UNP and its pro-imperialistic thinking, the term ‘Bandaranaike policies’ was always treated with cynicism in our family circles. What exactly are these policies and where are they written? Or is it a convenient way of making the inconsistent Government policies look consistent?

Matured with years and with political wisdom gained through the events that shaped the country’s destiny at crucial junctures in its post independent history, it should now dawn upon us that it is in the sphere of Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy that these Bandaranaike policies have had its greatest influence. In 1954, Sri Lanka’s application to be a full member the United Nations was forestalled by Russia on the grounds that Sri Lanka was not a fully independent state.

Protectorate

In fact we were not, because we had British troupes stationed at Trincomalee and hence were a ‘protectorate’ of Britain and would not have been capable of independent thinking in a world forum. By then Sri Lanka had no diplomatic relations with Russia and our relations with Peoples republic of China was limited to how much rubber they needed and how much rice we needed.

The emergence of communism in the global scenario was viewed by the then UNP Government not only with disdainful prejudice but also with a sense of foreboding. That was the thinking imparted to us by the colonial masters for it was their own apprehensions against changing world order that hastened their exit from Sri Lanka at that time.

The new MEP Government led by S W R D Bandaranaike that came to power in 1956 made the country’s foreign policy more balanced and independent.

It saw the back of British troupes, established diplomatic ties with Soviet Russia, upgraded its relations with the People Republic of China and held the hand of friendship to numerous other newly independent countries irrespective of their political affiliations. This change in our attitude to the world made us acceptable to the UN and thus we became a full member of the UN. This in fact was tantamount to Sri Lanka receiving the citizenship of the world community and it was Bandaranaike policies that made that possible.

Since then, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy blossomed in an independent direction under the SLFP led Governments even though it retracted to be pro western again during UNP times. The high point in Sri Lanka’s foreign diplomacy was when she was elevated to lead the Non Aligned nations in 1976, under the Chairmanship of Mrs Bandaranaike. Sri Lanka stood as a true leader of the socialist block, the Arabs, the Africans and all others who desired to tread an uncompromisingly independent foreign policy against the backdrop of big power rivalry in the 70’s. This helped Sri Lanka establish new and lasting friendships with world nations earning their respect as a committed Non Aligned member. The cynics and the capitalists however dubbed the non aligned summit as the ‘Tamasha of beggars’ partly betraying their antipathy for organizations that expressed willingness to steer clear of imperialistic dependencies. After almost 33 years, when the imperialist global forces tried to bury Sri Lanka in a cog mire of ‘human rights violations’ for vanquishing the world’s most ruthless terror organization, the LTTE, look who supported her to come out of it!

29 nations supported her, 12 opposed while 6 abstained in the UN Human Rights Council that is made up of 49 nations.

The countries that supported Sri Lanka are the non aligned countries and those who opposed her are, by and large, the former imperialists now turned-champions of human rights. Isn’t this a vindication of the Bandaranaike foreign policy?

The event, apart from establishing the rights of nations for their suzerainty, served also to expose the chicanery of these imperialists in ‘human rights’ garb. Could a handful of Tamils inveigled by terrorist have more human rights than half a million Iraqis, thousand of Palestinians and an ever increasing number of Afghans? What is even worse is that Sri Lanka was fighting a battle for its very survival within its own territory while the imperialists are massacring hundreds of thousands in lands many miles away just on premonitions.

Melvinas

This support for Bandaranaike foreign policy should rightly be evaluated with the UNP foreign policy from 1977 to 1989 that was aligned to the west. When India dropped ‘Parippu on Sri Lanka’ in 1986, Sri Lanka had an extremely pro-western Foreign policy. In fact it was even pro- Israel and Sri Lanka also established the record of being the only country that supported Britain when it justified the annexation of Melvinas (Falklands) Islands in 1979. But after having been an ardent supporter of the west, little Sri Lanka had to look askance for support to assert her legitimate air rights. All her western ‘friends’ told her to ‘sought things out’ with her giant neighbor, India. As J R Jayewardene confesses in his autobiography it was under those circumstances that he had to sign the Indo Lanka accord that hoisted JVP terrorism, death, destruction and finally a white elephant called the ‘Provincial councils’. What a contrast, the non aligned friends and the western friends?

The west gave us independence grudgingly, because they feared a ?communist take over? of the colonies. They knew that independence meant little as long as they can keep our ruling class inveigled in western values and life styles.

That was more or less and insurance policy for them to keep us servile to them. After having granted independence they readily accommodated political asylum seekers from ex colonies posing a challenge to the law and order situation in new regimes. At every turn the west tried to impress us that we are not capable of managing our own affairs.

The western press quoted the TamilNet without verifying, dubbing it as a ‘reliable source’. Although they are overtly friendly, when it came to core matters they are very subtle and hostile. All this infers that the west, particularly British, have still not realized that Sri Lanka deserved to be treated as an independent country and the Sri Lankan Government as the democratically elected legitimate Government of the country.

The fault however lies partly in our own thinking. For generations we have been accustomed to English and English standards that we are unable to come out of our own servile thinking towards Britain just as Britain is.