Sri Lanka’s Friendship With China And Partnership With India
by Ruwantissa Abeyratne
( March 13, 2015, Montreal, Sri Lanka Guardian) International relations is first and foremost a political tight rope walk. For example, when one puts two related statements and a politico-legal construct together, the portentous risks associated with international relations surfaces with undeniable clarity.
The first statement I refer to is that of the newly appointed Chinese Ambassador to Sri Lanka Yi Xianliang who is reported to have urged both the Sri Lankan Government and the Chinese company involved in the Colombo Port City project to observe the rule of law and keep mutual trust and confidence in each other when solving issues related to the project. The Ambassador was referring to the Colombo Port City Project signed by and between the previous government of Sri Lanka and a Chinese construction company which has been suspended following a decision taken by the Cabinet of Ministers.
The second statement is that of Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India who recently said, on his impending visit to Sri Lanka: “I am delighted with the opportunity to visit one of our most important neighbours. I look forward to discussing our bilateral relations with President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. I am also looking forward to meeting other political leaders of Sri Lanka. We will work together to forge a new partnership between our countries”. Partnership in this context could mean working together for mutual benefit, mostly to the exclusion of others. “New partnership” could mean that there was a partnership which is old hat and unsatisfactory. Either way, India is looking for stronger and more cohesive ties with Sri Lanka.
The politico-legal construct is whether a previous government’s agreement can be disregarded by a later one. The two statements together result in an interesting cocktail of political and diplomatic confluence. The construct that follows Sino-Lankan relations make that beverage an ominous potable for Sri Lanka.
The Chinese Ambassador’s statement, made in the context of a purely commercial agreement implies China’s involvement and interest in the contract. This brings to bear Sri Lanka’s relationship with China. According to President Maithripala Sirisena: “The foreign policy of Sri Lanka will continue moving through the path of non-alignment and cordial relations with all nations of the planet”. The Administrator of 9th of March said about President Sirisena’s statement to the British authorities during his visit to London: “A spokesperson for the President quoted him as having told UK Defence Minister that China was Sri Lanka’s friend. The President also mentioned about Chinese support for Sri Lanka’s development. Referring to Chinese naval build-up in the region as well as UK’s own relationship with the People’s Republic of China, Fallon (British Defence Minister) pointed out to Sri Lanka’s military links to China. Throughout the war, China remained one of the most important military suppliers, with the Sri Lankan military depending on Chinese transport aircraft, heavy gun boats and a range of artillery pieces among other equipment. The President emphasized that Sri Lanka was determined to handle its foreign policy in a way not inimical to anyone”.
According to this press release President Sirisena (and therefore Sri Lanka) regards China as a “friend” with whose relationship will not cause Sri Lanka’s foreign policy to be hostile to any country. Recently, China is reported to have said in the context of President Sirisena’s visit to India, as per Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying who told media commenting on Sirisena’s visit to India and various agreements reached between the China and Sri Lanka:”Sri Lanka and India are friendly and important neighbours to China”. China too has clearly categorised both Sri Lanka and India as friendly neighbours which by no means is a “partnership” and provokes thought in the context of Mr. Modi’s “new partnership” with Sri Lanka.
India on the other hand is not merely a neighbor of Sri Lanka. It is our next door neighbor. Culturally, linguistically and historically, we are closest to India. Next door neighbors form implicit partnerships with one another. They exchange food and come to each others’ aid in times of distress.
It is interesting that Prime Minister Modi did not use the words “strategic partnership” in terms of India’s relations with Sri Lanka. Luis Blanco in his article Strategic Partnerships – A New Form of Relationship in International Relations says there is a distinct difference between “partnership” and “strategic partnership”: “Since the end of the 1990’s a new language has been gaining relevance in the international realm… The introduction of the “strategic partnership” expression in the International Relations vocabulary is recent. Whereas “partnerships”, “alliances”, “free trade agreements”, “co-operations” and “special relationships” are older kinds of relationship between international political actors, “strategic partnerships” start its consolidation as a language that defines relationships in International Relations in the 1990s”.
Going on the language used, Sri Lanka will have a friend in China and in India we will have a partner. Trade-wise, Sri Lanka is India’s largest trading partner country in the SAARC region. The bilateral trade between India and Sri Lanka has grown four times in the last nine years increasing from US $ 658 million in 2000 to US $ 2719 million in 2009. The main Indian exports to Sri Lanka are Petroleum (Crude & Products), Transport Equipments, Cotton, Yarn Fabrics, Sugar, Drugs Pharmaceuticals & Fine Chemicals. The main Sri Lankan exports to India are, spices, electrical Machinery except electronic, Transport Equipments, Pulp & Waste, Natural Rubber and Paper Board.
It is interesting to see whether India seeks an expansion of, and extension to this partnership.
Now for the last part of the equation – the legal construct. Can Sri Lanka ignore commitments made to and agreements signed with China by the previous government. Government is the governing body of the nation, State or community. A nation is the people of the State. A State, as defined in the Montevideo Convention of 1933 has to have four elements: a defined geographic area; a permanent population; a government; and the ability to engage with other States. Therefore the government is really the people, particularly in a democratic country. People never change although governments may change. Therefore it is arguable that, since the same people represented by the previous government are represented by the current regime, any agreement made by a previous government with a country would not been extinguished merely on regime change. If Sri Lanka reneges on its past contracts, we may lose China as a friend.
Now we have the triangle all in place. It is time to get a ringside seat in the big top and observe the tight rope walk.
