In Plain Humour

By Rusiripala Tennakoon –AUGUST 3, 2017

Rusiripala Tennakoon

Following excerpts are from an Old English Saturday night Prime Time Comedy show:

You… can be a millionaire…and never pay taxes! You can be a millionaire… and never pay taxes?” First… get a million dollars. Now… you say, “Steve… what do I say to the tax man when he comes to my door and says, ‘You… have never paid taxes’?” Two simple words. Two simple words in the English language: “I forgot!” How, many times do we let ourselves get into terrible situations because we don’t say “I forget”?  Let’s say you’re on trial for armed robbery. You say to the judge, “I forgot armed robbery was illegal.” Let’s suppose he says back to you, “You have committed a foul crime.  You have stolen hundreds and thousands of dollars from people at random, and you say, ‘I forgot’?” Two simple words, “Excuse…..me…”

What a world for us to live!

A village guy climbed a Kitul Tree just to taste a little Kitul Toddy.  Of course on the sly. Unfortunately got caught to the owner of the tree. He asked why did you climb-up my tree. Guy answers – “just to see whether I can find a little grass for my cow.”

Owner retorted – where do you get grass on top of trees?

Guy very politely says, “My friend that is why I am coming empty handed” who can disbelieve this rustic lad?

A play where the script is being written!

A Minister serving in a cabinet of a government is asked by a judge at an inquiry

Did you go to occupy this luxury apartment with your family?

Answer –  the Hon Minister  “Yes your lordship”

Question – Do you know that this apartment was leased out by a person accused or alleged of a scam involving public money?

Answer – “No your lordship.”

Question  – Do you know Mr.  Minister how much is the lease rental for the apartment paid to the owner by who-ever?

Answer – “No your lordship”

Question – Do you know who arranged for your family to move into this apartment?

Answer – My family – Wife & daughters Your lordship

Question – Did you ask your family how much it costs?

Answer – No your lordship

Question – Did your family ever inform you that the lease rental is USD 10,000 per month?

Answer – No your lordship

Question – If you knew that this apartment was leased out by a person accused of a charge dealing with public money – would you have occupied this apartment?

Answer – No your lordship

Questions yet to be asked

Question –  Do you now know that the apartment was leased out to this questioned party?

Answer –  (may be)

Question – Now you know that you have done something which you should not have done as a Minister –

Answer –  I did not know then your lordship.  In my busy schedule I only slept there.

Question – But you know now that you have occupied a premises which you should not have occupied.

Answer –  Your lordship my head was burdened with the debt burden of the country at that time.

People –  Now that you know, you have done something which you should not have done why don’t you go home!

When we learnt civics in the elementary school we learned that “Ignorance of the law is not excuse”.  But those of us who did not pursue the studies up to the law degree are not aware whether “Ignorance of facts can excuse one from ethical obligations and public liability”.

We read, see and enjoy comedies, plays and writings on the subject. But a clear answer has to come by way of acceptable verdict.  Till then we continue to surf the domain in quest of a proper reply.

Ignorantia juris non excusat

“ignorance of law excuses no one”

“The rationale of the doctrine is that if ignorance were an excuse, a person charged with criminal offenses or a subject of a civil lawsuit would merely claim that one was unaware of the law in question to avoid liability, even if that person really does know what the law in question is. Thus, the law imputes knowledge of all laws to all persons within the jurisdiction no matter how transiently. Even though it would be impossible, even for someone with substantial legal training, to be aware of every law in operation in every aspect of a state’s activities, this is the price paid to ensure that willful blindness cannot become the basis of exculpation”

Read More

Undated letter was an“oversight”: Ravi

2017-08-03 

Minister Ravi Karunanayake said that the undated letter, sent to the then Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran was “completely an oversight.” He said that he had not indicated the date and the reference due to an oversight.

When Additional Solicitor General wanted to know the reason as to the origin of such a letter the Minister explained the situation he had as the Finance Minister in the beginning of the 2015.

He said that there was an unaccounted debt in balance and an outstanding repayment amounting Rs. 100 billion, when they assumed duties as the new Government in 2015.

The witness said there was a meeting on February 26, 2015 with Mr. Malik Samarawickrama and Kabir Hashim over the fund requirement of Rs. 75 billion for road development projects.

The meeting was held prior to the controversial bond auction that took place on February 27, 2015.
When questioned he confirmed that there was no sudden need to raise money in February but the funds were required for the payments in RDA projects.

The witness said Mr. Mahendran requested him to send a letter relating to what happened at the February 26, 2015 meeting between the three ministers and thereby he had sent the letter in May 2016.

This letter contained the idea that it was decided at the meeting on the fund requirement of the Government for Rs 75 billion.

The ASG questioned the witness as to why there was no date or reference in the letter. The witness said it was an oversight.

Then the ASG asked whether there was a copy or corresponding Ministry’s file relating to the letter. The witness said he forwarded the letter in response to a request made by Mr. Mahendran.

The ASG repeatedly questioned him as to why he had not mentioned the person who requested the letter.

The ASG was of the view that this letter was created very recently because when it was produced before the PCoI, the letter was apparently new and “crisp.”

However, the witness denied the ASG’s stance and maintained what he said.

When the ASG was attempting to question further as to how the letter originated, the Commission said it was a waste of time because the witness has already made his stance before the Commission.

However, there was a heated argument thereafter between the Commission and the ASG over the relevancy of further questioning on the matter. (Shehan Chamika Silva)

Ravi K denies all in apartment deal

• Submits that he did not know of Perpetual link to apartment, lease or purchase 
• Contends apartment is only 2,000 sq. ft. not 4,000, family reimbursed Walter and Row rental fee
• AG submits SMS messages from Aloysius phone detailing meetings with ‘RK’ 
• AG presents 13 instances when Ravi and Aloysius were overseas together 
• Aloysius lawyer and Ravi K dispute number of meetings in Singapore 
• Minister contends Govt. was in need of extra funds in Feb. 2015 to repay road contractors

By Uditha Jayasinghe -Thursday, 3 August 2017

Foreign Minister Ravi Karunanayake yesterday remained defiant before the Presidential Commission of Inquiry denying any knowledge of payments made on the Monarch apartment allegedly rented on his behalf and rejecting conflicts of interest with Perpetual Treasuries Director Arjun Aloysius even though he admitted to a longstanding friendship.

Karunanayake, who was Finance Minister when the bond auction under inquiry took place on 27 February 2015, responding to several fiery rounds of questions by Additional Solicitor General (ASG), President’s Counsel Dappula de Livera, repeatedly denied any knowledge of the apartment being leased for his family by Walt and Row Ltd. till the matter was raised in Parliament by MP Mahindananda Aluthgamage in June 2016. Aloysius and his father are directors of Walt and Row and the company leased the fifth floor apartment for a monthly rent of Rs. 1.45 million. The commission was also informed that Perpetual Treasuries has 28 subsidiary companies.

During five hours of questioning, the Foreign Minister noted after the revelation in Parliament his family had reimbursed Walt and Row fully and a receipt for the transaction remains in his possession.

Karunanayake also told the commission days after the presidential elections in 2015 he resigned as Director of Global Transport and Logistics (GTL) Ltd and about eight other companies where he held the same position. His wife and daughter Onella had taken over the running of the company from that point.

As he was no longer a Director and was severely busy as Finance Minister, Karunanayake insisted that he was unaware of accommodation decisions made by his family.

During the testimony he described that his house in Battaramulla was about 20 years old and had been damaged by a minor fire caused by an electric shortage, which had prompted a renovation. It was at this point that the family had reached out to Anika Wijesuriya, who was known to the family as she was businessman Nahil Wijesuriya’s daughter. Nahil Wijesuriya headed Sathosa when Karunanayake was Trade Minister under a previous Government. Anika and Karunanayake’s children had also gone to school together and the Minister acknowledged the families were close. As a result the Minister insisted he had not questioned the decision to move into the apartment.

Even though the apartment was initially rented for six months the renovations to their house could not be completed in time, forcing the Karunanayake family to extend their lease by two months and afterwards purchased the apartment for Rs. 165 million. The Minister insisted that payment was made through GTL. During cross questioning by Commissioner P.S. Jayawardena, the Minister disputed the area of the apartment saying it was only 2,000 square feet, even when presented with the deed that stated it was 4,000 square feet. The Minister appealed to the commission to re-ascertain the size of the apartment.

When Judge Jayawardena recapped the previous testimony given by GTL Chief Financial Officer (CFO) B.R. Chinnaiya that the money to buy the apartment had been provided by GTL Chairman Lakshmi Kanthan in two cash tranches of Rs. 75 million and Rs. 70 million and questioned how such large amounts of cash were kept by GTL, Karunanayake denied wrongdoing and rejected any allegations of money laundering.

He also noted that Lakshmi Kanthan provided “consultancy services” to a number of local businesses and would have been remunerated for them resulting in the cash. The Minister also denied his wife and daughter would have been aware that linking with Walt and Row would be a conflict of interest to Karunanayake and admitted that if he had been aware of the connection at the time he would have avoided it.

Karunanayake also said an indirect method to lease the apartment was resorted to as the owner had refused to rent it to a politician. Commissioner Jayawardena recapped that Anika Wijesuriya had rejected such a statement.
SMS messages

ASG de Livera also submitted information digitally recovered from Aloysius’s phone that ran into several pages, including SMS messages that linked meetings between Aloysius and a person referred to as ‘RK’ and in other instances ‘Ravi K’. The total information collected ran for over 8,000 pages but only those relevant to questioning were submitted to the commission. One text message detailed an appeal for ‘RK’ to intervene in a transaction involving Bank of Ceylon while another SMS talked of non-payment of funds to the Sunday Leader newspaper and proposed the start of a gossip website to promote top politicians including Karunanayake on social media. Yet another sent on 28 November 2016 asked Aloysius’s assistant Steve Samuel to “remind PM and RK on Board paper”, which ASG de Livera said was linked to the Monetary Board meeting held later the same day. A calendar event on the phone in March 2017 was for a “meeting with RK. Proposed auction for the week.”  The Minister denied any knowledge of the events or people involved.

ASG de Livera then submitted documents charging that Karunanayake and Aloysius were in Singapore and Kuala Lumpur on 13 occasions at the same time but this was later disputed by Aloysius’s lawyers who contended that their trips only overlapped a few times and even so was no indication that they had met. Karunanayake accepted he had met Aloysius “twice or thrice” in Singapore, especially at the Finance Asia Meeting that was sponsored by Perpetual Treasuries. He also denied several times that they had discussed bond auctions or any linked transactions.

When the questioning moved on to former Central Bank Governor Arjuna Mahendran, the Foreign Minister accepted that they were longstanding friends. Karunanayake contradicted earlier testimony that the Government did not need to raise a higher amount of funds explaining that after the Government was elected they had uncovered Rs. 1.1 trillion unaccounted for debt left by the previous administration and had decided it needed to be repaid gradually.

During a meeting with top Cabinet members on 26 February 2015 Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe had outlined the need to raise about Rs. 75 billion to repay road building contractors who had stopped work. Karunanayake emphasised Central Bank and Treasury officials had been aware of this need but stopped short of disclosing if the Treasury had been told to officially notify the Central Bank to increase its bond amounts at the 27 February 2015 auction. The Minister insisted deciding the availability of funds was the “collective responsibility” of top members of the Government and not isolated as his duty alone.

Karunanayake submitted documents to the commission detailing the excess financial needs of the Government because of what he termed as “irresponsible action” by the previous Government. He also provided a letter he had issued to former Governor Arjuna Mahendran on his request detailing that the need for extra funding had been discussed by top officials. He told the commission the letter was for Mahendran to submit to the various commissions he was called before in 2016, which also included two Committees on Public Enterprises (COPE).    

In response, ASG de Livera contended the letter, which had no date or file name, could not have been maintained in such a crisp condition if issued in 2016 and charged it was issued recently to provide an explanation as to why the bond issuance on 27 February 2015 was increased tenfold. ASG de Livera also argued releasing such a letter was in contravention of Government due process. Karunanayake rejected that the letter was released recently and shot back he could not be held responsible for how it was preserved.      

Karunanayake was greeted by gleeful supporters upon his exit from the commission in the afternoon and gave a short statement in response to questions by the media.

“Wrong things have been shown under the label of Penthouse. I have my house near Parliament before I entered politics. These are not new things. Attorney General’s Department chases after those who formed good governance instead of going after thieves. I am happy today because the Attorney General’s Department questions a powerful Minister of this Government,” he said.              

SRI LANKA POLICE CONTINUES SHOOTING ‘SUSPECTS’; ONE KILLED, ONE INJURED

02/08/2017

The Asian Human Rights Commission reports two recent incidents in the South of Sri Lanka where police had shot at alleged ‘suspects’, killing one and injuring another.

The statements by AHRC follows:

The Asian Human Rights Commission has received information about Mr. Rajamuni Devage Gunadasa of second milepost, Rale Kanda, Alawwa, Warakapola in the Kegalle District.

On 26 June 2017, Gunadasa was walking in Warakapola Town along the Kandy-Colombo main road. While he was passing the town, suddenly a police vehicle belonging to the Warakapola Police Station approached him. He was arbitrarily shot by an Officer at close range. Before the arrest he was not noticed to have stopped walking. Gunadasa was seriously injured and later succumbed to these injuries. He was transported to the Warakapola Base Hospital for treatment by the Police.

Later the Police issued a media communiqué saying that the Police fired on a person who was escaping from being arrested. Police were attempting to arrest a person engaged in a theft. Explaining the reason for the shooting, the Police stated that the deceased tried to attack them with a hand grenade. In retaliation the Police opened fire on him at extremely close range.

No details were produced on the complaint that the Police received about the theft. No property had been stolen by the victim. Neither the supposed hand grenade nor any other weapon belonging to the victim was submitted in evidence as used against the Police.

Gunadasa’s relatives maintain that he was extra-judicially killed by the Police. This is another example of a gravely faulty Policing System in Sri Lanka. It murders innocent suspects under the guise of crime prevention.
————-
The Asian Human Rights Commission has received information about the case of Mr. Bodhipakshage Manjula Prabath Wijewardana of Nisansala, Arama, Aranayaka in the Kegalle District.

At 10:30 a.m. on 13 June 2017, Manjula was waiting on the main road, in front of the Mayurapada Central College in the Town of Mawanella. Without warning several police officers appeared in front of him, took aim and directly fired at him. Manjula’s left leg was hit and he fell to the ground. Later he was brought by police jeep and admitted to the Mawanella Base Hospital for emergency treatment.

Before the shooting, Manjula was not aware that the police officers were going to arrest him. He was not ordered by the police to obey their orders. Manjula did not know of any reasons why the Police would abruptly, without warning, directly shoot at him. He was not given any reason for his arrest or shown an arrest warrant. Police failed to produce any evidence that they tried to arrest him in a peaceful manner. Manjula respectfully states that he never tried to escape from being arrested by the Police.

A Police Communiqué was issued, stating that Manjula escaped being arrested by the Police. They never produced any independent evidence that there was a legally issued arrest warrant against him. No facts were submitted showing that Manjula tried to run away and prevent the officers from arresting him.

The family members of Manjula maintain that the Police attempted to extra-judicially kill their relative. This is another indication of the faulty Policing System in Sri Lanka. It extra-judicially kills innocent suspects under the guise of crime prevention.

Kavan Rathnayake’s excesses at Lake House news papers

Aug 03, 2017

Two brothers who are very unpopular with in the current government are Sagala Rathnayake and his brother Kavan Rathnayake.

Both were very close associates of the then Defense Secretary Goabaya. During the Presidential election campaign, the Sirisena camp was warned to be careful of the two brothers given their close connections to Gotabaya Rajapakse.

However once Sirisena won both got into the government and started merry making. Because of Minister Sagala Rathnayke’s closeness to the Prime Minister many UNP parliamentarians have distanced themselves from the UNP leader. He has effectively sidelined most of the Prime Minister’s old hands and got Mahinda Rajapakse’s old hands to take over the Prime Minister’s official residence.

Recently Kavan Rathnayake was moved out of Lake House for mismanaging the media, the lake house media helped to rebuild the Rajapakse’s by giving them adequate publicity.

Instead of sending him home, the Prime Minister sent him to the Tourism Board.  Trade Union members point out that Kavan Rathnayake had been drawing benefits and other privileges to the tune of one million Rupees a month on the guise of consultancy work and assignments.

They have written to the President asking for a full-scale inquiry

Court orders steps to be taken for release of Namal’s car

Don’t target family members not in politics – Namal asks govt

By Yusuf Ariff-August 3, 2017

The Kaduwela Magistrate’s Court today issued instructions to carry out the preliminary process, within 3 weeks, for the release of the luxury sports car which had previously belonged to MP Namal Rajapaksa and later sold to another individual.

The Police Financial Crimes Investigations Division (FCID) had filed a case after the car in question, a Ford Mustang, was discovered at a garage in the Kaduwela area. 

When the case was taken up today before magistrate Prasanna Alwis, defence counsel Premanath C. Dolawatta requested the court to issue an order to release the vehicle as it is being exposed to sun and rain and is eroding at one place at the impound. 

However, the state counsel had raised objections to the request citing the fact that investigations pertaining to the case are still ongoing. 

The defence attorney pointed out that it was regrettable that the vehicle is eroding away when a suspect has not even been named with the case which has been filed over the vehicle. 

After taking into consideration the facts presented before the court, the magistrate ordered that preliminary steps be taken within 3 week for the release of the vehicle while the case was postponed to August 31. 

China Buys Hambantota Port: Should India Be Concerned?

The deal assuaged some Indian concerns, but China’s economic dominance over Sri Lanka is still a worry.

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons/ Deneth17

By Narayani Basu-July 29, 2017

On July 25, China Merchants Port Holdings Co., a state-owned Chinese port operator, issued a press release that should make Indian security analysts sit up and take notice. According to the release, China Merchants Port Holdings Co. agreed to pay $1.12 billion for an 85 percent share of Hambantota port in Sri Lanka for 99 years. A portion of this sum is to be invested in a 49 percent cut of a new company called the Hambantota International Port Services Company (HIPS), in which the Sri Lankan government will hold the majority stake. The remaining $146.342 million is to be spent on operational expenses. The two companies will split functions at the port, with HIPS in charge of security operations. This means that HIPS – or Sri Lanka – will be in control of the military potential of Hambantota.

This fairly anodyne statement has a number of vital implications for three players – India, China, and Sri Lanka itself.

China has long been interested in the commercial and strategic potential of Hambantota. While the Indian Ocean is itself a crucial space, being the bridge between Africa and the Middle East on one side and Southeast Asia on the other, Hambantota is right in the middle of vital energy supply lines in the Indian Ocean, connecting the Middle East and East Asia. Not only this, but it is also a strategic link in Xi Jinping’s ambitious 21st Century Maritime Silk Road – a grand blueprint based on technical and economic connectivity that spans China, Africa, and Europe, which could very likely change the face of Eurasian geopolitics, should it come to fruition. Pouring funds into the development of the port, then, made sense for China, which is focusing more and more on expanding its geopolitical presence in the Indian Ocean.

Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month.

But the reality of China’s vision has been different for Sri Lanka. For this island nation, Hambantota has been the proverbial millstone around its neck. While the port city was envisaged as a busy deep sea port, giving life to a hitherto underdeveloped part of the island nation, things haven’t gone quite according to plan. Despite its prime location, Hambantota has struggled to attract either ships or cargo. In January  2017, when the foundation stone for the Sri Lanka-China Industrial Zone Development project was laid in Mirijjawila, Hambantota, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said that 55 Chinese investors had already committed to investing in the industrial zone, sowing the seeds for nearly 100,000 jobs. But the project ran into trouble right from the start – Sri Lankan locals protested against the loss of their land (the figures on the amount of land China requested differ; while a government minister said that 15,000 acres had been requested, Wickremesinghe said the figure stood at 1,235 acres), and politicians took the opportunity to clamor against what they called a loss of “sovereignty.”

As a result, the zone has barely got off the ground as far as functionality is concerned. Indeed, the Sri Lankan government called in the military on Wednesday to help distribute fuel after the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (which controls the bulk of oil supplies across Sri Lanka) called a strike to oppose efforts to lure foreign companies in to the oil sector. The strikes came a day after Sri Lanka cleared the revised deal with China on Hambantota. The port has an oil bunkering facility, along with container terminals.

Meanwhile, the Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport, which Sri Lanka built at a cost of $286 million in 2013 in the hopes of bringing tourists to an isolated, rural part of the country, has earned the sobriquet of the “world’s emptiest airport.” Similarly, Hambantota has the stamp of Chinese investment all over it – multi-lane highways, an industrial park and conference center, and a gleaming new cricket stadium. The only downside is that nearly everything lies empty. As a result, what was envisioned as a booming port city, thriving on international sea lanes and providing employment to thousands of locals, was transformed into a debt-trap of colossal proportions. With its debt to China mounting to over $8 billion, and despite a recent International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout, Sri Lanka has had no choice but to revise the deal in a bid to clear the slate with a power that is possessed of palpably larger economic and geopolitical clout.

Across the Palk Strait, India has been watching developments at Hambantota with deepening concern. Long accustomed to perceiving the Indian Ocean as its own sphere of influence (much as China perceives the South China Sea for itself), India has been rattled at China’s growing presence in the region. Indeed, New Delhi has lodged its concerns with Colombo over the docking of Chinese submarines as far back as 2014. The to-and-fro has continued until this year, with Sri Lanka – caught between two large regional rivals – turning down a Chinese request to dock its submarine in Hambantota in May this year.

For many China-watchers in India, then, the revised deal over the Sri Lankan port is good news – a symbol that Sri Lanka is working to allay India’s security concerns as far as China is concerned.

But India would do well to remain wary. China has already established its presence in neighboring Pakistan, with its port at Gwadar, which is also a vital link in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a flagship project under Xi Jinping’s Belt and Road Initiative. On the Horn of Africa, too, Beijing has made its presence felt, with the opening of its first overseas military base at Djibouti on July 12. In smaller, poorer countries like these, China’s influence is based heavily on economic leverage, using its formidable financial resources to create a niche for itself by focusing on industrial cooperation, environmental protection and the reduction of poverty, and by occasionally turning a blind eye to regimes that range from politically corrupt to outright dictatorial.

Meanwhile, tensions have been increasingly on the rise between India and China since the beginning of 2017, with matters coming to a head with the ongoing border standoff at Doklam, a disputed plateau in Sikkim. While all eyes have been turned northwards as a result, there is no doubt that India has been taking steps to protect itself in the Indian Ocean as well – allying itself with the United States and Japan in a clear bid to counter growing Chinese influence. But these are baby steps as yet – not only has New Delhi been lethargic in building strategic partnerships, but it lacks China’s skill in conducting what Brahma Chellaney calls “debt-trap diplomacy.”

As far as Hambantota is concerned, the deal may look promising on paper for India. But as long as Sri Lanka remains economically at China’s mercy, New Delhi would be wise to remember that Beijing remains free to call the shots.

Narayani Basu is an author and freelance journalist with a special interest in Chinese foreign policy and resource diplomacy in Africa and Antarctica. 

China's Hambantota Deal Is Bad News For Both Pakistan And India

Panos Mourdoukoutas -

AUG 2, 2017

Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port is officially China’s own port, for 99 years. That’s according to a landmark agreement signed early last week, which gives China Merchants Ports Holdings—an arm of the Chinese government--70 percent stake in the Indian Ocean’s prominent outpost.

The Hambantota port expansion begun with loans from China. But when Shri Lanka could not pay back the loans, Beijing converted these loans to equity, in essence turning Sri Lanka into a "semi-colony," as was the case with China’s own Southern ports after she lost a war with European powers--though in a subtle way.

The taking over of Hambantota by Beijing is bad news for both Pakistan and India -- for different reasons.

For Pakistan, the deal will serve as a model for the future of CPEC (China–Pakistan Economic Corridor), a huge transportation network connecting China to the Arabian Sea at Pakistan’s Gwadar Port. Like Hambantota, CPEC started with loans that will eventually be converted into equity, as it seems very unlikely Pakistan will ever be in a position to pay them back. This means that Beijing will one day own CPEC, and collect tolls from every vehicle that makes use of it.

For New Delhi, the Hambantota deal is bad news because it’s one more step to encircle and pacify India by Beijing. China’s enormous investment in CPEC, and port infrastructure in the Indian Ocean, serves much more than trade. It advances Beijing’s “String of Pearls” strategy, as well as its unofficial agenda to encircle India through its arch-rival, Pakistan. 

To be fair, the Hambantota port will make it easier for India to trade with Sri Lanka. But it could also be used as a naval station for China should the two countries ever engage in a full-scale war.

Meanwhile, China’s growing presence in Sri Lanka undermines India’s efforts to influence the foreign policy of the country.

That could explain India’s efforts to contain China’s Indian Ocean agenda by forming alliances with US and Japan, and by performing a joint naval exercise in the Malabar in the Bay of Bengal last July.

Still, the prospect of a Pakistan debt problem or an open confrontation between India and China are very unlikely, at least for the time being. That’s why investors in the region have chosen to focus more on market fundamentals rather than on the geopolitics of the region, driving shares in all three country markets higher recently.

But that could change, if tensions between China and India’s new allies, America and Japan, continue to flare.