Sirisena Stirs Up Another Controversy By Appointing Ministry Secretaries Without Consulting Line Ministers

 December 14, 2017

President Maithripala Sirisena stirred up a hornet's nest yesterday when he changed the Secretaries of social ministries without consulting line ministers.

The Ministry of Fisheries and Aquatic Recourses, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Urban Planning and Water Supply, the Ministry of Law and Order, the Ministry of Postal Services and Muslim Religious Affairs and the Ministry of Special Assignments have got new Secretaries. 

Informed government sources said the line ministers were disappointed and dissatisfied with the President's conduct. Among them are some influential Cabinet Ministers representing the SLFP. 

However, the circumstances leading to the 'reshuffle' of ministry secretaries are still not clear. Sources close to the President said it was aimed at making the state machinery more efficient.

It is learnt that the issue will be raised by the disgruntled Ministers at the next Cabinet meeting .

Activist withdraws appeal on airing Sri Lanka war documentary

Pusat Komas accounts manager Faribel Maglin reads out Lena Hendry’s message to reporters after the activist withdrew her appeal over her conviction.

Ho Kit Yen

 | December 14, 2017

Lena Hendry says she has lost faith in the judiciary and would rather fight for another cause.

KUALA LUMPUR: Human rights activist Lena Hendry has withdrawn her appeal over her conviction for airing an uncensored documentary on the Sri Lankan civil war in 2013.

In a message to reporters after the High Court struck out her appeal, the former Pusat Komas programme director said she decided not to pursue it as she had lost faith in the judiciary.

“The charge should not be brought against me at all, and prosecuting me under censorship laws was done in bad faith,” she said, adding that she would rather fight for another cause.

Her message was read out by Pusat Komas accounts manager Faribel Maglin.

Lena is currently doing her master’s degree in applied human rights in England.

Earlier in court, her lawyer New Sin Yew told Justice Mohd Sofian Abd Razak that they had written to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) to withdraw her appeal on the conviction under Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act, and RM10,000 fine imposed by the Magistrate’s Court in March.

“We withdraw our appeals on condition that the deputy public prosecutors also withdraw their appeal against the RM10,000 fine,” he said.

Deputy public prosecutor Zalina Awang told the court the AGC had agreed to withdraw its appeal after examining Lena’s case.

New said Lena had decided not to pursue the case as she did not want a criminal charge hanging over her while she was studying.

“She made a decision to move on as it would be time-consuming if the appeal proceeds.

“There may be a likelihood of increased fine or sentence,” he added.

The Magistrate’s Court fined Lena RM10,000 on March 22 after finding her guilty of airing “No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka”, a documentary on the Sri Lankan civil war which lasted for 26 years.

She committed the offence at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Chamber of Commerce Hall on July 3, 2013.

Lena paid the fine and was initially freed from the film censorship charge in the Magistrate’s Court at the end of the prosecution’s case last March.

However, the High Court overturned the acquittal and ordered Lena to enter defence for her charge.

Ranjan stands firm in SC

Lakmal Sooriyagoda-Friday, December 15, 2017

Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake yesterday reiterated that he stands by what he had said regarding the judiciary and lawyers of Sri Lanka recently.

Addressing media outside the Supreme Court premises, Ramanayake said he is not afraid to tell the truth that ordinary people and corrupt politicians are treated differently by the judiciary.

“A poor who commits a minor offence such as stealing a street light bulb had been jailed for several months, under the Public Property Act. Corrupt politicians who stole millions of rupees in public funds can get anticipatory bail to avoid being arrested, after retaining a President’s Counsel,” Ramanayake said.Two petitioners had made complaints to the Supreme Court seeking a contempt of court action against Ramanayake for allegedly making disparaging remarks on the reputation of the judiciary and lawyers, at a press conference held on August 21.

Churchill as Finance Minister (Chancellor of the Exchequer)

“There are two ways to acquire the niceties of life. The first is to produce them; the second is to plunder them. When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorises plunder and a moral code that glorifies it” – Paul Valery

Friday, 15 December 2017

Very few of today’s readers are aware that Winston Churchill was one time the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1924-29), a position comparable to our Finance Minister. At the time, Great Britain was perhaps the largest economy in the world, the centre of a global empire on which it was claimed the sun never set. Much of international trading and financial transactions were London based then.

This proximity to power, trade and money of course did not mean that the Chancellor of the British Exchequer automatically became a wealthy person. One of the striking features of the British Empire was its public service (broadly inclusive of its legislature and the judiciary) ,both in Britain as well as its far flung colonies, which, by and large retained its integrity and lustre; a system that later provided the model for the now independent colonies.

Having left the Conservative party to join the Liberals in 1904, Churchill re-joined the Conservatives in 1924 now under the leadership of Stanley Baldwin commenting wryly, “Anyone can rat, but it takes a certain ingenuity to re-rat!” Baldwin made him Chancellor of the Exchequer. Churchill was not cut out for the humdrum of State finance. It needed an epic, the far more dramatic setting of a World War to bring out the inherent genius of the man in full measure.

As to the minutiae of high finance, he pretended no mastery. When the suggestion was made to return to the Gold Standard at the pre-war parity (WW1 1914-18), Churchill gave ear to a wide range of opinions for and against, once even arranging an all-night discussion between the two sides to thrash out the pros and cons. Many government officials were for the Gold Standard while there was strong opposition from important quarters, including the economist John Maynard Keynes.

Although the 1925 decision to return to the Gold Standard was initially popular, it soon proved to be an unwise move, resulting in huge loses to the industries and the larger economy, with adverse global consequences. Churchill regretted the decision as one of the biggest mistakes of his career.

Keeping the home fires burning

There was very little mixing of public office and private interests. All his life, Churchill had to work hard to keep his home fires burning; mainly writing, an occupation which later earned the redoubtable Englishman a Nobel Prize in literature. The famed Churchillian taste for all things good, the richness of his dining table was legendry, ensured a home fire that burnt fast and furious.

A typical dinner at Chartwell, his country home is described thus: “Dinner, the day’s main event is scheduled to be served at 8.30. He may reach the drawing room at 8.45. It is lunch (partaken lavishly early afternoon) on a far grander scale, with more guests, of greater distinction, silvery buckets of iced champagne, Churchill presiding in his grandest manner, and several courses. Among the foods likeliest to be served are clear soup, oysters, caviar, Gruyere cheese, pate de foiegras, trout, shoulder of lamb, lobster, dressed crab, petite marmite, scampi, Dover sole, chocolate éclairs and, of course, roast beef and Yorkshire pudding. Clemmie (Clementine, his wife), who knows his preferences, has briefed the cook on what is to be on the menu.

“If he has been in London recently, different versions of his latest witticisms have been repeated in the clubs of Pall Mall and St. James’s, in drawing rooms of the West End and the city counting rooms. Asked now to confirm them, he nods as he gropes for a match or the stem of his wineglass, pausing occasionally to correct a verb or alter syntax. He tells of how crossing Parliament Square, he ran into Lord Londonderry, his cousin and frequent adversary. Londonderry hoping to drive home a point had asked him, ‘Have you read my latest book?’ Winston chortles his reply, ‘No, I only read for pleasure or profit’.

“It is difficult to keep up with a host who can set such a pace. Nevertheless, the dinner is not a one-man show; guests have been invited for lustre, not servility.

“The talk was by no means confined to politics; it ranged over history, art and literature; it toyed with philosophical themes; it visited the past and explored the future. Sometimes the conversation was a ding-dong battle of wits and words between say, Winston and Duff Cooper, the verbal pyrotechnics waxed hot and fierce, usually dissolving into gales of laughter. Frequently he would recite ‘Horatius’, and this was very popular with the children.

“All his guests meet his conversational standards: ‘the man who cannot say what he has to say in good English cannot have very much to say that is worth listening to!’

“After the ladies have left, men gather around him for port, brandy and cigars, he will sit around till 10PM, or later, talking of great political issues of the past, battlefields of his youth, strategic innovations of the American Civil War (1861-65)-Churchill can re-enact any battle in that war, from Bull Run to Five Forks, citing the troops engaged on either side, identifying the commanders, describing the passage of arms, the aftermath.

“It is 11PM; Churchill sees his overnight guests to their rooms and as they retire, begins his working day. Only after entering his employ will Bill Deakin discover to his astonishment, that Churchill lacks a large private income, that he lives like a pasha, yet must support his extravagant life with his pen. The Churchill children are also unaware that, the family literally lived from book to book and from one article to the next. Clementine who knows, prays that each manuscript will sell. Luckily, they all do, the editors and publishers, both in Britain and America, pay him the highest rates. His output is prodigious.” – ‘The Last Lion,’ William Manchester

Sri Lankan way of looking at things

This was a man, who before becoming Prime Minister in 1940, was not only once a Chancellor of the British Exchequer, but also at various times, Home Secretary, First Lord of the Admiralty (1911-15), Minister of Munitions, Secretary of State for War, in addition to several other high appointments in the government and the armed forces. In 1915, after resigning from the Cabinet, Churchill volunteered; going to the Western Front to face the fearsome German barrages as a middle order military officer.

For us in this country, with vastly different experiences and expectations of holders of public office or even what is considered ‘manly’ or ‘gentlemanly’ conduct for that matter; it is difficult to comprehend either a person or a career such as of Churchill. A Sri Lankan Cabinet Minister resigning in order to go to the trenches to do battle for King and country is unthinkable in our context. His physical attributes and even the mental make-up will only make a Cabinet Minister a burden to the fighting men.

On the other hand, if dressed in immaculate white; in bearing, spuriously humble; in mentality, sly; in skills, mediocre; in attitude, vulgar; and protected by a large posse of soldiers, we might say with awe, behold a man!

In such a culture, cunning is taken for intelligence, commonness equated with affability, a petulant effeminacy seen as toughness, sentimentality interpreted as empathy and irresponsibility hailed as decisiveness. With this way of looking at things, it is no surprise that a thug is seen as a hero, a financial sharper as an economic wizard and nepotism as dutiful conduct!

Keeping the wolf away from the door

Only a few years after serving as Chancellor of the Exchequer, Churchill was struggling to keep the wolf away from the door. Sometime in 1936/7 he received an unwelcome letter from the Editor of Evening Standard terminating his long term contract for “divergence” of policy , including the then prevailing appeasement of Nazi Germany. In 1938, the blow fell when recession hit the Wall Street, where Winston had lain his reserve. Stock prices plummeted so swiftly, and so deeply, that his broker told him that his American investments had been wiped out and that in fact, it was worse, he owed the brokerage firm 18,000 Pounds.

It appeared Churchill had no choice, his beloved home Chartwell and its 80 acres will have to be sold. He would have to quit parliament to make money as a writer, lecturer, and/or businessman. He discussed with Clementine plans for economising; “Told Sarah (daughter) I will give her £200 towards expenses, fuel for Chartwell to be delivered in five ton batches of £ 11, the wine has been very strictly controlled and little drunk” and finally he wrote on a note of triumph “I am not taking Inches (valet) with me abroad!”

Clemmie knew that the little saved by leaving his valet behind would shrink to insignificance beside his Riviera expenses. Experience has taught her that budgets did not work with the Churchill family, the reason, although he would never have acknowledged it – he was the family spendthrift.

Ruin was only averted by the intervention of a few devoted and well-heeled friends and admirers, who made financial arrangements that enabled Churchill to commit himself fully to the cause of challenging the Nazi menace while they managed his portfolio. It was only a financial reprieve, a loan, and not a gift; Churchill was to repay in time with the money his books brought him.

The tragedy of our times

The public offices that Churchill held during his life, in Sri Lanka are considered finger-licking good prospects for earning commissions and kick-backs. High Office is an opportunity, not to take your valet abroad at your expense, but for the whole family to see this big wide world at public expense. The holders of high positions in Sri Lanka end up not only much richer for the effort, but leave behind institutions they touched sullied, diminished or demoralised.

Churchill was an Englishman, of a time and of a history. He gave his best to his country, its institutions and its cause. This is something we cannot say of many of our leaders. That is the tragedy of our times, and perhaps, even climes.

SriLankan Airlines: Marching Orders Served To Chairman Dias, CEO Ratwatte And Directors By Airline’s Alliance Of Unions

author: COLOMBO TELEGRAPH-December 12 2017

Whilst blaming their Chairman Ajith Dias, Chief Executive Officer Capt. Suren Ratwatte and the entire Board of Directors for their incompetence, the Alliance of Unions of SriLankan Airlines collectively sent in a letter stating that they have no confidence and trust should the current Senior Management of the airline be retained after 31st March 2018.

The letter which was also copied to President Maithripala Sirisena, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, selected Government Ministers and the newly appointed Committee to look into the restructuring of the airline, was in response to letters Chairman Ajith Dias and CEO Capt.Suren Ratwatte had sent to all staff earlier, issuing them a soft warning of the imminent closure of the national carrier.

Their strongly worded letters stated that state banks will no longer be able to fund the loss making airline and that a proper restructuring of the national carrier will take effect shortly by a team of government appointed Ministers which will include a foreign consultant. Their task is to restructure the airline in order to attract a potential investor or restructure the airline in such a manner that in can be self-dependent if in the event a foreign partner cannot be attracted or if either or both options are not available, closing down the airline.

Chairman Dias’ letter to his staff further reiterated that this process will commence on the 11th December 2017, with a preliminary report to be submitted by the 20th December 2017, as the entire way forward of the airline needs to be completed by the 31st March 2018. Thereafter the letter stated that the Government of Sri Lanka will not be able to fund the national carrier using tax payer funds.

 

In response the Alliance of Unions of SriLankan Airlines based their reasons on stating that the Chairman, CEO and the entire Board of Directors were all government appointees with not having the prerequisite competencies and with having little or no experience in running the affairs of the airline. It also went on to accuse them of failing to execute their duties during the last three years, drawing hefty sums in salaries and perks and not turning around the airline’s existing financial woes.
Further it went on to accuse them of shielding their predecessors of blatant malpractices committed in the past, despite a comprehensive investigation being carried out by Lawyer J.C.Weliamuna and his team in February and March 2015, who recommended that the former Chairman Nishantha Wickramasinghe and CEO Kapila Chandrasena should face public prosecution. This is besides the naming of many existing employees who are also currently shielded, such as Head of Human Resources Pradeepa Kekulawela, who were responsible for aiding and abetting malpractices and fraud in the past.

The letter went on to highlight that there are also dealings which could itself be a conflict of interest for a Director in any company. This statement has a direct reference to Rakhitha Jayawardena whose recent appointment as an Executive Director to oversee the lucrative In Flight Catering Operations of the airline that also supports the airline’s In Flight Duty Free business. His appointment which was done recently in a hushed manner, is still unknown to many employees. Besides this appointment Jayawardena is also the current President of a mega Duty Free operator that caters to multiple airlines across Australasia. The lucrativeness of the airline’s In Flight Duty Free business recently saw the airline being robbed off millions in US Dollars, when the business was outsourced out of tender procedure to Phoenix Duty Free Services (renamed Duty Free Partners) and run by Rumesh Dilan Wirasingha and Raju Chandiram between 2012 to 2017.

Whilst going on to blame Chairman Dias, CEO Ratwatte and the entire Board of Directors, the letter also stated that the airline was used as a center piece by the current Yahapalanaya Government in their political campaign especially in pulling off the Presidential Election in January 2015 and the General Election in August 2015 over the former Rajapaksa regime. 

.

Read More

Chinese trick: Unviable port turns strategic asset

Colonel R Hariharan-Dec 13, 2017

China gaining operational control of the Hambantota Port marks yet another strategic milestone in furthering president Xi Jinping's ambitious 21st century maritime silk road. The Chinese control of port infrastructure and assets already acquired in Gwadar in Pakistan and Djibouti (Horn of Africa), has strengthened its position in the Indian Ocean.

India's inability to respond in time to arrest China's growing power in Sri Lanka, particularly after then Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa's ascent, is the flip side of the tale. During the Eelam war, India could not meet Sri Lanka's request for supply of arms due to strong opposition from Tamil Nadu, and China stepped in to meet the demands.

Hambantota is not the only strategically important infrastructure project to be completed with Chinese aid. Others include the Colombo container terminal expansion and the Colombo reclamation project overlooking Colombo port, a vital hub of India's shipping.

In 2006, I availed an invitation to meet Rajapaksa on issues affecting Sri Lanka. When I asked him why he offered the Hambantota project to China instead of India, he laughed and said that he had invited India first. When India didn't respond for nearly a year, he approached China. I later learned that India did not respond as the project was not economically viable.

India's assessment has proved correct as both the Hambantota port and the Mattala airport are losing money. But strategically, India's decision had proved costly. China took the risk of making huge investments in economically unviable projects, to ensnare Sri Lanka into a US$8 billion debt trap and leverage it to draw the island nation within its strategic orbit. China has shown that taking economic risks for gaining strategic advantage is what grand strategy is all about. After Hambantota proved a burden on Sri Lanka economy, China is enacting as the saviour by agreeing to the debt-equity swap on Hambantota project, while gaining control of it.

In July 2017, Sri Lanka signed an agreement with the state-owned China Merchants Ports Holdings Company (CMPort) which agreed to pay $1.12 billion for 85% share of Hambantota port for 99 years. After a hue and cry was raised at home over the unfavourable terms of the agreement, Sri Lanka renegotiated it, under which the CMPort (85%) and Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) (15%) became partners in the Hambantota International Port Group (HIPG) to develop the port into a commercially viable asset.

India had been watching with concern China's control of the port as it legitimises its strategic presence within India's sphere of influence in the Indian Ocean. President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe after coming to power had tried to balance the relations with India, which were skewed in favour of China, under President Mahinda Rajapaksa. In response to India's strategic concerns, they had assured that Hambantota port would not be permitted to be used as a military base.

Hambantota International Port Services Ltd. (HIPS), owned by HIPG (58%) and SLPA (42%), is, however, taking over common user facilities in Hambantota port including port security. This would indicate the near impossibility of excluding the Chinese from port security activities. But, can a small country like Sri Lanka do much, if China rides roughshod over its objections to gain military advantage in times of Sino-Indian military confrontation?

China is now gaining not only a military advantage but also a commercial edge in South Asia. When the China-Sri Lanka free trade agreement (FTA) comes through, Chinese business will be capable of using India's FTA with Sri Lanka to gain backdoor entry into Indian markets. China has sprung a surprise by signing an FTA with Maldives, a country till now dependent on India for almost everything. When China's FTA with Sri Lanka and Maldives fully bloom, Chinese goods flooding South Indian markets, is a real possibility. It is time India took a hard look at its military and commercial strategies as the Chinese behemoth is breathing down its neck.

(The writer served as the head of intelligence with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka)

‘JVP agreeable to Provincial Councils system with modifications’ 

Vijitha Herath

2017-12-15

JVP MP Vijitha Herath in an interview with Dailymirror spoke about the current political situation in the country and his party’s novel way of approaching issues at hand. Following are excerpts of the interview done with Herath. 

Provincial Councils are a part of our legal system though we like it or not

TNA no longer demands Federalism

Land and Police powers have to be discussed

Our thinking should be different from the war time

JVP stands for socialism with modern Sri Lankan characteristics 

We asked people to close down the grocery shop of Mahinda Rajapaksa

We also ask people close down the grocery shop of the present Government 

There is no difference in the level of corruption and frauds between now and then 

Now we see frauds in expressways, splurging public money for the luxuries of ministers 

QHow is the JVP getting ready for the elections?

This is an election which the Government declared grudgingly. We all had to fight to get this election. There is a new electoral system which is an improvement of the previous system. It will ensure better representation for women and elect members answerable to their respective electoral wards. We stand for such a system. We will contest the elections in all parts of the country. We have no issue in fielding candidates. 

 
QThe JVP is getting ready for this election with a new political complexion. Instead of fielding members from its cadre, the party is inviting members from the civil society to contest together. What is the reason for this political change?

Of course, we extended an open invitation to progressive individuals, who don’t indulge in corruption and have no record on frauds. They are also ready to forgo their monthly salaries even as elected members, to participate in the elections with us. A lot of people at grassroots level have consented. They are in our nomination lists. They will join hands with the party cadres. We will introduce a code of conduct for all the candidates. This is a precursor to the formation of a broad political front at the 2020 elections.   

QThe JVP did something similar at the last parliamentary elections. Yet, some members such former Auditor General S.C. Mayadunne left the scene after the elections. Why is that?

 As for former Auditor General S.C. Mayadunne, he is a person who did a lot of voluntary work. He works with the JVP even today. Yet, he is not a card holding member of the party. He resigned from his parliamentary seat over his disappointment regarding some persons elected during this time. He upheld the view that people had elected some persons unfit for such positions. So, he believed it wasn’t the proper avenue for him to be in. Yet, he is still with the JVP.   

QThe JVP played a role in the election of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2005. In 2015, your party indirectly worked for the victory of current President Maithripala Sirisena. How do you compare and contrast the two Governments? 

During each time, we took the decision that was the most appropriate in our view. In 2005, there was a need for it. We were able to defeat the secessionist forces that were at work. After the defeat of terrorism, that Government was heading in a wrong direction. We were opposed to it.   
We didn’t play a direct role in the election of this Government. It was an indirect role that we played as you said. In simple metaphorical terms, we asked people to close down the grocery shop of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa. At the same time, we said we couldn’t vouch for the quality of items on sale at the shop of President Sirisena. This is our position.   

QYou said ahead of the elections that you weren’t certain about the quality of items kept on sale at the shop of Mr. Sirisena.This Government has been in power for nearly three years. What have you got to say? 

We said so at that time before opening the shop. Now, the shop is open. We are sure now that there is no quality in the items on sale. We are now asking people to close it down. We are ready to open our own shop. We are asking people to shop with us. We don’t have any errant trading practices. 

In fact, we advocate socialism with modern Sri Lankan characteristics. In literary terms, we explained that Russian shoes were too large for us. Likewise, Chinese shoes are too small. So, we say neither Russian model nor Chinese model is applicable to us

 
Q What is your assessment of the performance of the present rule?

To be honest, there is no difference between now and then. The same political formula is followed by the present Government. This Government vowed to take action against corruption and frauds of the former rule. It didn’t happen. Corruption and frauds continue unabated. There was the Central Bank Bond Scam. There are frauds in the execution of expressway projects. The Government splurges public money for indulgence in luxuries such as maintenance of the houses of ministers, the purchase of vehicles for them etc. Compared with the previous rule, we don’t see a stoppage in corruption and fraud.   

QHow do you view the policies of the present Government from the perspective of socialism?
The neo-liberal economic policies, being adopted by this Government, are outdated. It was introduced in 1970s. The whole world is clamouring for something new. Even the Pope said neo-liberalism only created wars and homicides. So, the world wants a new model. Sri Lanka isn’t an exception.   

QHow does this model differ from what your party espoused at the time of its inception?

What matter isn’t what we said in the past. There is something we utter now. Today we talk about planning, production, people’s participation and equitable distribution of wealth. It isn’t to be a model purely executed by the state. The Government decides on planning of the economy. For the execution of it, both the state and the private sector play a role. 

 
QWhat should be the specific role of the Government?

The Government should work out the policies. The private sector should be invited to play a role in their execution. The Government also plays a role in the economy. It creates a competition between the two for the forward march of the country. There are certain areas exclusively meant for the state, though.   

QWhat are they?

Environmental protection is one. The Government should hold its sway on the energy sector. If it’s left in the hands of the private sector, it will give them undue bargaining power.

   
In fact, we advocate socialism with modern Sri Lankan characteristics. In literary terms, we explained that Russian shoes were too large for us. Likewise, Chinese shoes are too small. So, we say neither Russian model nor Chinese model is applicable to us. We have to make our own shoes. In fact, our founder leader Rohana Wijeweera said it.   

We didn’t play a direct role in the election of this Government. It was an indirect role that we played as you said. In simple metaphorical terms, we asked people to close down the grocery shop of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa

QYour party had its own analysis of the reasons for the ethnic problem. It had its own view on power devolution as a means to resolve it. What is the current position?

The Provincial Council System isn’t a solution to the national question. We stick with the same stand. Whether we like it or not, the provincial councils are a part of the system now. Then, there is a dialogue on the constitution making process. The Tamil parties, that were extreme and demanded Federalism, don’t do so now. They have taken a moderate position. It is unrealistic to achieve Federalism in the country. In such a context, the JVP is agreeable to resolve the national question with certain modifications to the current provincial council system, rather than leaving room for the aggravation of the problem further. If other parties reach this position, we will fall in line to proceed with modifications to the current provincial council system.   

QWhen you say modification of the system, does it mean the abolition of the concurrent list?

We aren’t for pruning of powers of the provincial governors. We need to discuss the land and police powers. We haven’t taken hard and fast positions in this regard. If we do so, it will be a barrier for talks. We have to discuss how modifications or amendments can be brought about without leaving room for separatism.   

We hold the same view in regard to the concurrent list. We remain flexible. We don’t say the concurrent list should remain intact. We are ready to arrive at a moderate position after talks.   

QEarlier, the provincial councils were seen by your party as a stepping stone to separatism. How do you view it now?

That was the situation which remained when the separatist armed group existed. Today, nine years have lapsed after the war concluded. Today, the society has evolved. If we continue to keep battering the dead tiger literally, we can’t move forward. We believe our thinking should be different from the time during the separatist armed struggle. As a party, we have embraced change. Some interpret it as a change we undertook as part of our understanding with the Government. It isn’t true. In fact, we discussed the need for a change in our thinking soon after the war victory in 2009. 

 
QBut, you didn’t talk of an amendment or modification of the provincial council system then.
There was no such dialogue. Yet, we said we should start thinking afresh on the post way context. We asked for the truth and reconciliation commission.

 
Q Now, do you see a transformation of attitudes in the Tamil National Alliance (TNA)?  

In certain areas, they have undergone transformation. We are happy about it. The TNA sought Federalism. Now, they don’t ask for it. The JVP is opposed to the merger of the northern and eastern provinces. The TNA knows that it is practically impossible. Yet, the TNA uses it as a political slogan.   

QHow strong is the separatist ideology in the north?

There is a group taking extreme positions. It seeks regional autonomy. We see extremism both in the north and the south.   

QThe JVP supported the Government to secure two-thirds for a Bill to postpone the elections to the Provincial Councils. The Speaker himself said he was also embarrassed in the way the Bill was enacted. What do you feel?

It isn’t a Bill to postpone the elections, but to change the electoral system. We asked for a change in the electoral system covering all the local bodies, the provincial councils and Parliament. Already, there is a law governing the elections to the local bodies under a new system. There is no such law for elections to the provincial councils. We aren’t agreeable to it. That is the reason to support the Bill. The procedure adopted was flawed. Yet, it was well-intended. 

 
QIn the same way, there is the possibility of postponing elections to Parliament. What have you got to say?

This is an opinion established by the cabal of those in the Joint Opposition. The JVP won’t leave room for it.   

QDo you think the UNP brought that Bill purely to change the electoral system, but not as a ruse to withhold elections?   

 Not only the UNP, but also the SLFP had the same objective of withholding elections. They had different interests. We had genuine interests.   

Indian Ocean politics of the 21st Century 

– A view from Sri Lanka

December 14, 2017, 9:47 pm 

(This is an edited version of a presentation made by Tissa Jayatilaka on Tuesday, 31 October, 2017 at the ‘Roundtable Discussion’ jointly organised by the Mario Einaudi Centre for International Studies and the South Asia Programme of Cornell University, Ithaca, New York)

Continued from yesterday

The creation of wealth and enhanced economic activity in the IOR will not only bring benefits but also pose enormous security challenges to us all. Most of the world’s armed conflicts are presently located in the IOR. Besides the waters of the Indian Ocean are also home to continually evolving strategic developments, including the rise of regional powers with nuclear capacities. Conflicts in the Gulf, unrest in Afghanistan, rise of violent extremism, growing incidents of piracy in and around the Horn of Africa loom over the region. All of this has led to the substantial militarisation of parts of the IOR. In Sri Lanka’s view, the vital Sea Lanes of Communication in the Indian Ocean that fuels the global economy needs to be open for all and must be used for mutual benefit in a sustainable manner. It is essential to maintain peace and stability in the IOR which ensures the right of all states to freedom of navigation and overflight.

In terms of the maritime build up in the Indian Ocean, we see India, China, Japan, Australia and the United States envisaging various projects from ocean excavation to placing remote sensors for ocean research. The United States, China, India and Japan are deepening their naval presence. Naval power is expected to play an increasingly significant role in regional affairs. This in turn will lead to naval power competition, with plans for sea control as well as sea denials.

There are massive challenges to be met. Maritime pollution is one such. The Indian Ocean, we are told, has the second largest accumulation of floating plastic waste in the world. It is the region where larger tankers, container vessels and the like plying between west and east, dump their waste. Oil and tar are common sights on Sri Lankan beaches. Recent studies estimate the amount of oil and petroleum discharged into the Indian Ocean to make up about 40 percent of the total petroleum spill of the oceans of the world. Undercurrents of naval build ups in the South China Sea are being felt in the Indian Ocean. China has established its first overseas military base in the Indian Ocean rim nation of Djibouti, causing serious concerns in Delhi.

Sri Lanka faces a continuing issue of poaching and rape of marine life in the Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar due to illegal fishing by Indian fishermen. Bottom trawling by these fishermen are causing immense damage to Sri Lanka’s precious marine resources and harming livelihoods of Sri Lanka’s fishermen. Research in countries like Somalia have shown that illegal fishing by foreign vessels was ‘a fundamental grievance that sparked piracy and provides ongoing justification for it’ according to analysts quoted in leading Sri Lankan newspapers. According to these sources, among foreign vessels found indulging in such illegal fishing are those belonging to so-called developed European countries, like Spain for example, who send their surplus trawlers and mother ships to exploit tuna stocks and other Indian Ocean resources using satellites to track movements of schools of fish. Some countries like Indonesia, for example, have been less tolerant of illegal fishing in their waters. It has been reported that in 2016, Indonesia had blown up foreign boats confiscated for fishing illegally in its waters. Of the 23 so blown up, 13 were from Vietnam and 10 from Malaysia.

The Indian Ocean plays a crucial role in the future of both China and India. The sea routes through the Indian Ocean are vital to China’s maritime trade and energy supply. Both countries need to respect each other’s legitimate interest in the region. As Anit Mukherjee of the Rajaratnam School of International Studies of the Nanyang Technological University of Singapore observes, the United States can be considered a resident power in the Indian Ocean given its bases in West Asia (Kuwait, Bahrain, the UAE and Qatar), in the Horn of Africa (Djibouti) and in Diego Garcia. In addition, on the eastern flank of the Indian Ocean, the United States has a military presence in Thailand, Singapore and Australia. As it is pre-occupied in West Asia or the Middle East, the United States is comfortable with India playing a leading role in the Indian Ocean.

Some analysts view this above development as an indication of stretched United States resources, given its interests in East China and South China Seas. Nilanthi Samaranayake et al of the CAN ( a non-profit research and analysis organization based in Arlington, Virginia) view it as ‘a security burden sharing’ between India and the United States in the IOR. Enhanced Indo-US defence co-operation received a fresh boost with the 26-28 September 2017 visit of US Defence Secretary James Mattis. The latter is the first cabinet-level visitor to India under the Trump administration. It was also the first follow-up visit by a US cabinet official after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s June 2017 visit to the US. As I speak here today, we also know that Secretary Rex Tillerson has since visited Delhi as well. Prior to his visit to India, at a speech he made at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington D.C., Tillerson noted, among other things, that the United States wants to ‘dramatically deepen’ ties with India.

Although no major announcements were made during the Mattis visit, it needs to be noted that in 2016, the United States acknowledged that India was now a major defence partner. India may not become an ally in the way Japan or South Korea or any of the NATO countries are, but even if limited co-operation develops, that will prove a strikingly complex change in the defence relations between the two countries. Such a momentous change will have an impact not on just South Asia alone. It is likely to impact significantly on the strategic dimension of the larger Asia-Pacific region presently dominated by the United States and China.

According to the current affairs magazine ‘India Legal’, the United States decision to supply 22 Sea Guardian drones to enhance India’s naval surveillance in the India Ocean was announced during Prime minister Modi’s meeting with President Trump in June 2017. These drones are expected to help the Indian Navy to keep a close watch on the Chinese naval ships and submarines in the Indian Ocean. India, it appears, is the first non-NATO country be given the drones by the United States. ‘India Legal’ quotes former Indian Foreign Secretary Lalit Mansingh as saying:

Yes, Indo-US defence co-operation is very much in focus, especially as for over 20 years, Washington had denied us all military technology. The nuclear deal changed the parameters of relations, and today there is robust co-operation and a US willingness to transfer high-end military technology to India.

Noting that the unspoken part of this defence relationship is China, Mansingh goes on to observe:

The desire to balance China’s growing military and economic power in Asia by encouraging India was there from the time of George W. Bush. If American focus is on balancing the power equation in India, India, too, wants the US as an insurance against China.

Students of international relations are of the view that there is likely to be closer co-operation among China, Pakistan and Russia to meet the challenge of a possible joint defence arrangement among the United States, India, Japanand Australia. We thus see that tensions in the region are most likely to escalate given that the United States and China on the one hand, and India and China on the other are competing for dominance in the IOR. It must be noted, however, that this above-referenced possible joint -defence arrangement is not a new idea. In the aftermath of the Indian Ocean tsunami of December 2004, President George W. Bush announced that India, the United States, Japan and Australia would set up an international coalition to coordinate rescue and rehabilitation operations. Suhashini Haidar writing to ‘The Hindu’ refers to this proposed multilateral grouping as ‘the Quadrilateral or Quad’. According to Haidar, the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was most enthusiastic ‘voicing his long-standing idea of an "arc of prosperity and freedom" that encompassed India, and brought it (sic) into a tighter framework with Japan, the United States and Australia, which were already close military allies’. Concerns about the Quad in Beijing, Haidar suggests, led to the United States moving away from the idea in 2007, given other priorities in the pipeline at the time such as the strategic efforts underway to move for sanctions against Iran in the UN Security Council and the six-nation talks on North Korea. Haidar poses an interesting question in conclusion:

A decade later, the question is: will the Quadrilateral melt away as before, or is it an idea whose time has finally come?

Sri Lanka is a small state and one of its strengths has been the significant diplomatic role it has played on the international scene over the years. Sri Lanka has had a reputation in the diplomatic world for unusual success in explaining and clarifying to the global North the concerns, concepts and complaints of the South. Many Sri Lankan scholars, diplomats and intellectuals have shown the same capacity for generating Northern interest rather than ire. Sri Lanka is indeed unlikely to be able to change the geopolitical realities of the region surrounding us. But through a pragmatic foreign policy based on avoidance of alliances with any one power bloc and maintaining friendship with all, we should be able to play a constructive role as in the past in the emerging new order. Sri Lanka, it will be recalled, played a key role in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and in calling for the possible declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace (IOPZ) beginning in the 1960s and 1970s respectively.

Given the above-referred to constructive role played by Sri Lanka in the diplomatic world, the categorical statement made by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe on behalf of the Government at the Second Indian Ocean Conference hosted by Sri Lanka in September 2017 regards the Sri Lanka Government’s decision to develop its major sea ports, especially the Hambantota port which some claim to be a military base, is to be welcomed and worthy of quotation in full:

I state clearly that Sri Lanka’s government headed by President Sirisena does not enter into military alliances with any country or make our bases available to foreign countries. We will continue military cooperation such as training, supply of equipment and taking part in joint exercises with friendly countries.

Only the Sri Lanka Armed Forces have the responsibility for military activities in our Ports and Airports. We are also working with foreign private investors on the commercial development of our ports.

Sri Lanka should now push for an international code of conduct for military vessels traversing the Indian Ocean. ASEAN and China have agreed to prepare such a code for the South China Sea. The Indian Ocean Code could be along the lines of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and China regarding the rules of engagement for safety in the air and maritime encounters. Such a code could recognise and seek to deal with the escalation in human smuggling, illicit drug trafficking, and the relatively new phenomenon of maritime terrorism. According to specialist opinion, UNCLOS does not have adequate provisions to address these issues of recent origin. Any code on the freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean must include an effective – and realistic – dispute resolution process.

This code of conduct should ideally be built on a consensual basis with no single state dominating it. In this regard, the United States Pacific Fleet Commander Admiral Scott Swift addressing the annual ‘Galle Dialogue 2017(a defence seminar dealing with the Indian Ocean region hosted by Sri Lanka) in early October said the following as quoted in ‘The Island’:

For the last 70 years, the India-Asia Pacific region achieved unprecedented level of stability and prosperity, due in large part to our collective respect for- - and adherence to - - international norms, standards, rules and laws. These benchmarks were not imposed by one nation upon another. Rather they emerged through compromise and consensus, with all states having an equal voice, regardless of size, military strength or economic power.

The IOR needs a security architecture that is of mutual benefit and one established on a multilateral basis with an effective multilateral governing structure. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe speaking at the inauguration of the Indian Ocean Conference in Singapore in 2016 called for the formulation of an Indian Ocean Order with accepted rules and regulations that would guide interactions between and among states. Importantly he called for this Order to be built on a consensual agreement in which no one state would be allowed to dominate it.

Here are my concluding thoughts. Through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB), it is apparent that China is desirous of becoming a global power. Although, relatively speaking, the United States is in economic decline it will remain a global power for the foreseeable future, given especially its superior technological and naval capability. If the United States and China as the key international actors, and India and China as the pre-eminent regional players, can maintain a power balance, then the IOR could take off socially and economically and be a boon not only to the Asia-Pacific but to the world. To be sure, as in all equations in this equation that I have outlined, too, there are imponderables. That said, if we could achieve the golden mean between competition and cooperation and somehow avoid the bitter and relentless divisiveness that characterised the Cold War era, our collective future would and could be something to look forward to.

Concluded

Thoughts on the Budget and what comes next

Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera presenting the 2018 Budget in Parliament

Friday, 15 December 2017

The recent Budget definitely improves on previous budgets. It is a promising debut for Mangala Samaraweera, the new Finance Minister. He sees it as the beginning of long-delayed market reforms.

In his opening remarks to the Budget statement, he promised to reform factor markets to “free the economy”, and to “liberalise and globalise” to improve competitiveness. He also promised fiscal consolidation – to boost revenues as a proportion of GDP, reduce budget deficits, and deliver a primary budget surplus. His goal is an ‘Enterprise Sri Lanka’ that will unleash the entrepreneurial energies of small and large businesses.

Thoughts on the Budget and what comes next.docx by Thavam on Scribd

WELCOME TO THE SURVEILLANCE STATE: CHINA’S AI CAMERAS SEE ALL

By Ryan Grenoble.-14/12/2017

Across China, a network of 176 million surveillance cameras, expected to grow to 626 million by 2020, keeps watch on the country’s over 1.3 billion citizens.

Loaded with facial recognition technology and artificial intelligence that can keep tabs on people and their activities, the cameras represent a blessing for the security state and a nightmare for privacy advocates, dissidents and anyone else the Chinese government deems a threat.

To test the full capabilities of the system, the BBC sent journalist John Sudworth to Guiyang, a southern city with an urban population of about 3.5 million people, to see if he could get lost in the crowd:

 Spoiler alert: Surveillance cameras readily identified Sudworth as a “suspect,” and police had him in custody within seven minutes.

In describing their surveillance system’s full capabilities to Sudworth, Guiyang authorities revealed they store massive amounts of data on everyone they can identify, regardless of their target’s criminal status.

That permits them to track anyone’s movements through the city, identifying other people they meet with and tracing their path back in time for a full week.

Officials told Sudworth that only criminals need fear the technology, but judging how it’s reportedly been used to monitor and intimidate ethnic minorities like the Uighurs in Western China, that’s not entirely true.

Petty crime is fair game, too ― as is using more than the approved amount of toilet paper in public restrooms.

In the eastern city of Jinan, officials use cameras to identify and publicly shame jaywalkers. Photos of offenders caught in the act are shown on a screen next to crosswalks, along with personal information about the person, like their home address and ID number.

And as Human Rights Watch points out, Chinese surveillance technology ― which, in many cases, is being developed at least partially with funding from Silicon Valley venture capital firms ― isn’t limited to use in China.

In 2014, a Chinese telecom company sold monitoring technology to the government of Ethiopia, which has been brutally cracking down on protesters. Brazil, Kenya, Ecuador and Britain have all purchasedChinese video monitoring systems as well.

-huffingtonpost.com