‘President Rajapaksa - staunchest defender of SL’s sovereignty’

Rasika Somarathna

Veteran Media Personality, Mohan Samaranayake is a highly respected journalist who has contributed to both print and electronic media alike in Sri Lanka. He has written and

spoken on a wide range of topics which affect Sri Lanka and the world in general. He has contributed to the local media scene sharing his expertise on history, politics,

international affairs, development economics etc. over a three decade period. In this interview, he shares his thoughts on how the country emerged from a dark past, the political and economic challenges facing Sri Lanka, the prospects for more political and economic integration in the South Asian region and the changing international scene.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa

Q: Today a slow motion revolution is changing the world?

A: Yes, the foundations of the world order are being transformed dramatically and fundamentally. During the last two decades the international scene has changed. I would like to highlight two issues. One is the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90s and with that the collapse of the socialist system. The other was the weakening of the Non Alignment Movement, which really had a very effective voice in shaping international opinion for two-three decades. With these changes one single military power began to dominate the international scene with the aid of several other powerful countries. This transformation in global politics, aided the rise of some nations and conflicts among certain others.

Q: Today many countries are confronted with enormous economic, social and political challenges, especially smaller nations. In this context, how important is it to protect the interests of developing countries?

A: We must acknowledge the need for the spirit of openness and adaptability today, more than at any other time. In these changing times, the need to protect smaller countries in the developing world and to advance their interests vigorously is felt more than ever. It is important to remind ourselves that every country cherishes the values and traditions, and deeply held religious convictions it has nurtured over centuries. These cannot be diluted or distorted, by the imposition of attitudes or approaches which are characteristics of alien cultures.

In safeguarding economic interests of the developing world, fundamental injustices in the global trading system should be negated. Poor countries should not be bullied into complete liberalization of their markets, undermining local producers, while rich countries flout the very rules they claim to uphold. At the very least, the world’s richest countries must honour their commitment to tackling their own damaging practices.

Multilateral trade negotiations need fundamental reform, to be based on fair negotiations, not power play, so that developing countries have an equal place at the table. The interest of the developing world needs to be protected in another significant respect. It is vitally important to insist that the structures and procedures of multilateral organizations are uniform and consistent and devoid of discrimination.

Q: How did these issues affect Sri Lanka economically?

A: This new world order which emerged with the collapse of the Soviet Union was dominated by several powerful countries as I said earlier. They wanted to impose their economic model on our country as well. It advocated a total free market policy where the state had only a minimal role to play in the economic matters. It further advocated curtailing social welfare programmes to the public such as free health, education etc.

This was imposed in the name of globalization. Sri Lanka too had a dilemma, on one hand you could not antagonize powerful countries and on the other there was huge pressure to follow the new liberal economic model of the West. Certain regimes which came to power after 90s succumbed to the influence of these international power players from time to time.

In 1994, when Chandrika Bandaranaike ran for office as the candidate of the PA she criticized the economic policies of the previous regime. But after coming to power she had to toe the line and continue on the same economic model. The short lived UNP governance under Ranil Wickremasinghe embraced this new economic model completely.

They privatised key state institutions, cut down on social welfare and subsidies and plans were afoot to reduce the number of state sector employees drastically. This was the backdrop in which the present leadership of the country assumed office. On one hand it had to deal with economic unrest and on the other there was a raging internal conflict.

Q: Can you add more on the Sri Lankan conflict?

A: Sri Lanka was plagued by an internal problem for nearly three decades. There were others, but ours was a very formidable one. In the context of internal conflict too there were increased pressures from outside. They interpreted the national question in their own way and tried to impose conditions on us based on these assumptions.

Q: How did Sri Lanka defeat terrorism in the face of such international pressures as you have described?

A: Earlier every time a bomb went off killing innocent civilians, these outside forces asked us to go to the negotiating table. However, they did not practice the same in their countries. In the aftermath of the 9\11 terror attacks in the US, where thousands of people died, they did not speak to the Al-Qaeda, but went after them. We needed a strong leadership who could understand this duplicity and withstand these forces who interpreted our national problem in their own way. It is in this backdrop that President Mahinda Rajapaksa came to power. In the case of the separatist question he had a clear understanding of what was behind it.

He also had the wisdom and courage to reject the interpretations made by certain Western nations. They said that this was an ethnic issue which can only be solved through dialogue. The present government also followed the path of dialogue earlier in order to prevent bloodshed despite numerous intimidations by terrorists. However they later realized that the problem had another dimension as terrorists kept harassing innocent civilians. President Rajapaksa understood that terrorism had to be dealt with the language they understood and then had to go for a political solution.

Mohan Samaranayake

I remember when an earlier regime was in power the then government appointed a well known military officer renowned for his acumen in combat as Commander of Trincomalee. But later under pressure from certain foreign embassies in Colombo the then government annulled the appointment and recalled him to the city. Huge pressure was brought on this government too during conflict. The final stages of the humanitarian operation saw two foreign ministers of powerful nations paying a sudden visit to the country.

The President who was in Embilipitiya at the time summoned the duo there. He emphatically said that terrorism had to be ended and told them that a viable political solution would follow next. Unlike others President Rajapaksa never wilted under international pressure. We needed this kind of a strong leadership to prevail in the existing international environment.

Early in the fourth year of his six-year term, the President etched his name in history as the national leader who ended a 30 year long separatist terrorism that threatened the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. He gave leadership to defeat the most ruthless terrorist organization in the world; and united the country under one flag. In this endeavour most importantly he had the courage and determination to withstand both internal and external pressures. He brought a new political vision that sought both development and reconciliation to build a new Sri Lankan nation.

Q: What about the economic front?

A: The President came to power in 2005 with a thin majority. However he was able to see things in the correct perspective. On one hand, he correctly understood that we could not follow the same economic model, which the SLFP adopted in 60s and 70s. At the same time he was convinced that we could not completely go the same way advocated by the Western powers. He understood the need to open the market as well as protect local interests. He took steps to strengthen the state sector. No state enterprise was privatized. This government also took loans from the IMF and the WB, but in all cases on our own conditions rather than the ones imposed by them.

As Mahatma Ghandhi rightly said, “In this global age we can’t keep all our doors and windows closed. Neither can we afford to be completely blown away from the winds which come from outside.

We have to strike a viable balance”. The strong leadership we have today understood this reality correctly. There are many problems to be solved in the economic front, but now we have the correct blend and is on the correct path.

Q: Even at present a lot of international pressure is brought upon Sri Lanka?

A: Earlier terrorism was openly supported by certain countries. The LTTE ran offices in key capitals in the world. Even after proscribing the organization in these countries their offices, flag, symbols still remained. They keep pressurizing us to launch an international probe on so called alleged human rights violations, which is said to have occurred in the last stages of war. The end result of these attempts is to take Sri Lankan political and military leadership to International Criminal Court in Hague on charges of war crimes. This shows that they have not abandoned their attempts at putting unnecessary pressure on Sri Lanka.

However the past of certain countries which preach human rights, good governance etc. too should be looked at. They are the ones who invaded other countries to expand their empires while at the expense of thousands of lives. This in the past and in present look at what has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and certain others. Now look at the panel appointed by the UN Secretary General. It was supposed to be an advisory panel. However they now have gone public with their findings, this is grossly illegal. They have also tried to get this document to the United Nations Human Rights Council through the back door, without informing the country concerned - Sri Lanka. There is a procedure when discussing such issues.

These international bodies should abide by those procedures. Also due recognition should be given to established local mechanisms which are striving to come up with viable remedies such as the LLRC. Justice, fairplay and morality should be embedded in international law and it should not be the subject of political interference. It is unreasonable to expect a complete remedy for all issues in the short span of two and a half years since the Lankan conflict ended. Certain other countries which have faced similar situations have taken a number of years to come up with lasting solutions to major issues. At this crucial juncture what Sri Lanka needs is the support and understanding of the international community.

Q: Why is there so much interest in Sri Lanka?

A: Some say Sri Lanka is a tiny country. However, Sri Lanka is a giant when it comes to potential and its strategic location. Some of these developed nations are on the rapid decline today, people are marching against their system. A new world order is emerging where India and China are coming up as powerful economic entities. In this backdrop, it is important for these countries to have a foothold in Sri Lanka, so that they can use our strategic value to have better control of the region. So without exposing their real objectives they come carrying flags such as human rights, good governance etc. to intimidate us.

Q: What about regional politics, the SAARC Summit is around the corner, would it help to promote greater understanding and cooperation among South Asian nations?

A: The formation of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in December 1985 was hailed as a major diplomatic breakthrough. But SAARC’s slow progress and modest achievements subsequently has put a question mark on its effectiveness. To some, SAARC has been merely a talking forum. In comparison with other such formations such as EU, ASIAN etc. SAARC has failed to live up to its expectations. Only recently SAARC took a turn to the better. Today SAARC needs strong governments and strong nationalistic leadership to steer it towards achieving its stated objectives. Now we see such leadership is available among countries. This augurs well for the region. However since of late SAARC has helped contain many difficult situations in the region and has contributed to the beginning of a confidence-building process in South Asia. Additionally, the ratification of SAARC Preferential Trading Arrangement (SAPTA) by all SAARC members in December 1995 and their decision to create a SAARC Free Trade Area (SAFTA), establishment of a food bank etc. are steps in the right direction.

Q: How do you see Sri Lanka’s role in the future progress of SAARC?

A: Sri Lanka can make a significant contribution towards SAARC’s progress. Sri Lanka can share its experience as a country which has tasted success recently in a number of spheres. We could portray ourselves as an example where if correct policies are identified and pursued vigorously that it could produce tangible results. SAARC also should look to strike a balance between globalisation and domestic economic interests.

Q: There is talk about having a common currency among SAARC nations?

A: Common currency is a viable idea, but not now. There are large economic disparities among South Asian nations and they should be addressed first before embarking on such an idea.

Q: What about a common front against terrorism?

A:In terrorism SAARC has a resolution. But its practical implementation has been poor. But at present attitudes in this regards has taken a turn for the better. This time round we have a rare opportunity to have a uniformed policy on terrorism. All South Asian states, in varying degrees, have been the victims of extremism and terrorism. South Asia has had a history of cross-border terrorism. It is, therefore, in the interest of all to cooperate in the fight against terrorism.