Col R
Hariharan
President Mahinda Rajapaksa
appears to have taken a pragmatic decision to go ahead with the Northern
Provincial Council (NPC) election without tinkering with the 13th
Amendment (13A). The presidential proclamation made on the election last
Friday, has been welcomed by India as it has removed a rider that could have
hobbled India-Sri Lanka relations. The
NPC will go to polls along with the Central and North Western Provincial
councils which have been dissolved. According to media reports the PC elections
are likely to be held on September 27.
Fortuitously or otherwise,
Basil Rajapaksa, Minister for Economic Development, and the President’s
brother, was in New Delhi to convey the good news on holding the NPC election
to Indian counterpart he was meeting. According to the Sri Lankan External
Affairs Ministry's statement, Rajapaksa’s visit to New
Delhi was to deal with other areas of discussion, and was also “aimed at apprising
the Indian leaders on Sri Lanka’s changes to the 13th amendment — the move to
strip police and land powers to provinces.”
As it invariably happens when
Indian and Sri Lankan counterparts meet, there are two versions on what the Sri
Lanka minister discussed with Minister for External Affairs Salman Khurshid,
National Security Advisor Shivshankara Menon and the Secretary MEA Rajan Mathai
in New Delhi.
News despatches from New Delhi
said India
had emphasised to Rajapaksa the need “to fully implement the constitutional
provision dealing with devolution of powers to provinces without dilution and
go beyond it to ensure meaningful development.”The Indian
External Affairs Minister who welcomed the decision to hold the election asked
Basil Rajapaksa “not to dilute the provisions of a promised political
settlement known as the 13th Amendment plus.”
13A plus was a term President
Rajapaksa had coined during the Eelam War to keep India on his side. But he
“forgot” about it when political priorities overtook after the war. By bringing
13A plus back in the discussion, India probably wanted to remind the President
that India still remembered his unfulfilled promise. Of course, New Delhi’s
reminder also had the advantage of convincing the increasingly restive Tamil constituency
in India that New Delhi was sincere in pursuing the Tamil aspirations.
In a BBC interview the Indian
Minister of State Prime Minister’s office V Narayanaswamy on the same day,
reminded Sri Lanka that if it wished to change anything related to the
India-Sri Lanka Agreement (ISLA), which resulted in the 13A and in the setting
up of Provincial Councils, it must renegotiate with India.“When it
[international agreement]is signed between two sovereign governments, both
governments are bound to implement the agreement,” he said. If one government
wanted to change it, it should renegotiate with the other government. “One
government cannot unilaterally cancel the agreement,” he added.
Though this was the first time
a representative of the Indian government had publicly spoken about
renegotiating the ISLA, at present Sri Lanka may not opt for it. Sri Lanka will
have to come with a viable political option on the core issue of devolution of
powers to the Tamil minority if it wants to negotiate a productive, win-win
agreement.
Sri Lanka may be wary of undertaking this time consuming exercise for few other reasons reasons. Politically Sri Lanka may not be able to get its home work right before broaching the subject with India
Given Sri Lanka’s critical
economic situation, it would like to broaden India’s multifaceted economic
involvement and trade and commerce with Sri Lanka rather than jeopardise it by
reopening a touchy 25-year old issue. Moreover, Sri Lanka needs India’s support
when it confronts the issue of accountability for its actions during the Eelam
War at the UNHCR once again.
Lastly, the Indian coalition
government is already under siege due to fluctuating political realignments,
particularly in Tamil Nadu. And as the deadline for the Indian parliamentary
election nears, New Delhi is likely to be hypersensitive to any escalation of
tensions between India and Sri Lanka due to tinkering with the Indian
dispensation of 1987 vintage on the Tamil issue.
In this context, Namini
Wijedasa write up in the Sunday Times on the reaction of Basil Rajapaksa on his
return from New Delhi is interesting. Replying a pointed question whether the
Government had abandoned the bill on the removal of police and land powers from
the provinces he replied: “When we bring a bill like that, we don’t let go of
it so easily without informing the public. There are times when we have brought
that type of thing and retracted but we won’t give it up.”
According to the news item he
further said, “We hold the common position that it must be broadly discussed by
the public,” he said. “The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) is a good forum
for this.” This would indicate that Basil Rajapaksa had appraised India of the
proposed changes it would like to carry out in 13A based on the PSC recommendations.
On the
Indian Government reaction to the establishment of the PSC, the minister
is reported to have said,“They accepted it...Democracy is the best way and
India is of the opinion that all parties that respect democracy must
participate in it [PSC], including the Tamil National Alliance. They told us
that they notified the TNA several times of this and that they will do so even
in future.”
The minister explained, “It was an exchange of
information between the two countries. They told us their opinions, we told
them our opinions. This was a discussion between two friendly countries.” In
other terms, both sides reiterated their positions on the issues of 13A and
PSC.
India probably would like to
accommodate Sri Lankan use of the PSC to give a veneer of acceptance to the
proposed changes in 13A from all shades of political opinion. But the PSC has
become a joke after the main opposition parties – the UNP, the JVP and the all
important TNA have refused to participate in it. Even some of the partners of
the UPFA coalition like the LSSP and the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) are
averse to the exercise. Now it is largely a UPFA body of ‘yes men’ to approve
the changes in 13A. While technically the PSC might carry the day, politically
it would be a non starter.
India would like the TNA to
participate in the PSC deliberations in a bid to find a workable solution to
the impasse. But its argument may not carry conviction unless the other
opposition parties and the SLMC change their mind on participating in the PSC.
If we go by news reports, India had probably drawn Rajapaksa’s attention
that the PSC set up must have “all shades of opinion on board.” As this is
largely an internal political exercise of Sri Lanka, there is little India can
do.
So the PSC recommendations are
unlikely to improve the environment hostile to bring a meaningful resolution to
the overall devolution issue.
While
President’s decision closes one chapter of the Colombo’s political drama on the
devolution contretemps and the future of 13th Amendment, it opens up
another speculative chapter on the winners and losers of the NPC election with
its footnote on the fair conduct of election. Jaffna has already seen some
unpleasant acts of thuggery and mischief making targeted attack on the
detractors of the regime, notably the TNA which is likely to win a majority in
the NPC. Will acts of violence mar the much delayed exercise of NPC election?
Will the TNA be allowed to rule the NPC in case they get most of the seats in a
fair election? Only President Rajapaksa can probably can answer these questions
confidently.
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group Paper No.688 date July 8, 2013
