Whatever possessed an undoubtedly bewitched Government to deputize a senior intelligence official, alleged to have held command responsibility when detainees were severely and systematically tortured, to represent the State before the United Nations Committee against Torture (UNCAT)? One would be hard pressed to find a greater irony than this, per se.

Unwise strategic decision
The UNCAT was sitting this week to examine Sri Lanka’s periodic report submitted under its normal reporting obligations under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). In previous years, its report card on the country had been anything but positive.

But this was perhaps one of the few times that the Government had the chutzpah to put forward a representative of the intelligence apparatus against whom serious allegations had been leveled during the previous regime, as part of a UNCAT delegation. His presence resulted in a storm of controversy carried by prominent international news media. The Government retreated in disorder even as harsh questioning took place.Assessed on the bare minimum of strategic considerations, this was the proverbial red flag to a very testy bull, as it were. The exercise demonstrated disturbing frivolity at its very core. It may have been better if the Sri Lanka delegation had not gone to the UNCAT at all.

Soothing murmurs on the counter-terror draft
As someone commented casually to me some days ago, Governments never realize that actually trying to govern with a modicum of commonsense is by far the best way to deflect public criticism. Instead, the very opposite applies. We have obfuscation, lies, more lies and hollow statistics.

The Rajapaksa Presidency unblushingly employed this strategy as its official stance. Belying its sunshine rhetoric, the Government is falling into this very same trap. This is unsurprising given that so many tarnished officials in the public service, the security sector and even the state law office continue with nary a pause. Indeed they tarnish the reputations of their colleagues working as best they may in very difficult circumstances.

But in Geneva this week, the Government assured soothingly that Sri Lanka’s proposed counter-terror law ‘would conform to international norms and standards.’ As critically questioning experts looked on, it was asserted (adding insult to palpable injury), that the support of United Nations agencies had been obtained in the drafting process. As my conversationalist expostulated, ‘Well, if this is what the United Nations is doing in Sri Lanka, no wonder there are such tremendous concerns about the world body itself at several levels.’

Need legislation tailored to our concerns
The UNCAT was informed that the Parliamentary Sectoral Oversight Committee on National Security will vet the counter-terror draft before it is forwarded for approval to the Cabinet. So we are told that the obnoxious draft will be ‘cleaned up’ through a parliamentary process which lacks transparency and in which there is little public confidence? This does not bode well. This document must be torn up forthwith and the process started anew.

What Sri Lanka needs is national security legislation tailored to its own needs and concerns in conformity with constitutional and international standards. For instance, adopting national laws of other nations which have very different threat assessments and terror concerns is unwise here. Were the United Nations agencies ‘consulted’ for this purpose, completely blind to these concerns?

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has admitted to problems with the draft and promised that these would be rectified. But as pleasing as this may sound to our ears, we should ask ourselves the question as to how this profoundly frightening draft characterized by complete overreach was finalized in the first place.

Inability to answer core questions
Then again, the Attorney General’s tired reiteration of a zero tolerance policy on torture fell on unsympathetic ears of the UNCAT. The overriding truth was that nothing very substantial had been done to address endemic torture in the North or in the South, broadly speaking. In fact, as one member of UNCAT reminded the government delegation in somewhat colourful language, ‘impunity for torture is hanging like a sword over the entire country and indeed, over your review”’

The question was very simple. How is Sri Lanka tackling the grave question of prosecuting and sentencing public officials for these crimes? There was no coherent answer except airy reassurances which meant very little. Official statistics on reported cases differed ‘very significantly’ with the data of other organizations including the main oversight body, the Human Rights Commission. At a different level, the Department of the Attorney General (AG) has not been able to show a different prosecutorial policy under Sri Lanka’s Convention against Torture (CAT) Act, one of the few good laws within the last decades.

Indeed, the CAT brings within its ambit, an officer of a police station, who “‘consents and acquiesces”’ in torture perpetrated by subordinates. Torture is defined as an act done “‘with the consent or acquiescence”’ of a public officer or other person acting in an official capacity (Section 12). Section 2 criminalises “‘any person who tortures any other person.’

A combination of ill-preparedness and angst.

As the objectors to the presence of Sri Lanka’s Director of Sri Lanka’s Centre for National Intelligence on the state delegation to UNCAT may have liked to know, the Sri Lankan law therefore holds culpable both the torturer and his/her commanding officer who acquiesces in abuses. This is a stand unequivocally taken by the Supreme Court in several precedents involving constitutional violations as well.

But even at a much less ambitious level, successful prosecutions under the CAT Act are abysmal. These are the pressure points at which the Government must show its difference to the past. Otherwise what we are left with is a choice between the bad and the infinitely worse. Is this the legacy of the ‘yahapalanaya’ unity alliance, trailing ignominiously in its wake the tattered rainbow colours of the ‘revolution’ that it once promised?

In sum, the ill-preparedness of state representatives and the angst caused by a controversial key intelligence official as an official ‘face’ of the delegation resulted in the 2016 UNCAT review being nothing short of disastrous for Sri Lanka. The questioning ranged from not allowing detainees speedy right of access to counsel to torture in prisons. This is a forerunner of the searching scrutiny that will come in the future.

One can only hope that the country will be better prepared then.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

PARIS, AFP –

Increasingly polluted rivers in Africa, Asia and Latin America pose a disease risk to more than 300 million people and threaten fisheries and farming in many countries, a UN report warned Tuesday.

Already, some 3.4 million people die every year from water-borne ailments such as cholera, typhoid, some types of hepatitis and diarrhoeal diseases, said the United Nations Environment Programme.
“Many of these diseases are due to the presence of human waste in water,” it said in a statement.

“The solution is not only to build more sewers but to treat wastewater.” The agency estimated that 164 million people were at risk of water-borne diseases in Africa, 134 million in Asia and 25 million in Latin America.

“The increasing amount of wastewater being dumped into our surface waters is deeply troubling,” said UNEP chief scientist Jacqueline McGlade.

“Access to quality water is essential for human health and human development. Both are at risk if we fail to stop the pollution.” The rise is driven by factory waste, runoff from fertilisers and pesticides used in agriculture, as well as an increase in untreated sewage discarded into rivers and lakes, the agency said.

“Severe pathogen pollution… is estimated to affect around a quarter of Latin American river stretches,” said the agency — up to a quarter in Africa and half in Asia.

In some countries, up to 90 percent of the population relies on rivers and lakes for drinking water, said the report.

Freshwater fisheries, which employ some 21 million fishermen and create some 38.5 million related jobs, are also at risk, while salinity pollution from dumped wastewater threatens irrigated crops.
“There is still time to tackle water pollution,” said the UNEP.

Polluted water must be treated before entering rivers or lakes, wastewater recycled for irrigation, and wetlands restored to remove pollution from runoff water.

“It is now time to use these tools to combat what is slowly becoming one of the greatest threats to human health and development around the world,” said McGlade.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Friday spoke in Colombo under the auspices of the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRSS) on the topic of “Sustaining Peace and Achieving Sustainable Development Goals.” He referred to the many Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the UN, but clearly went off track to compare what happened in Sri Lanka with what happened in Rwanda –which raised some eye-brows and asked the Government to reduce its military strength in the North ; something he would dare not ask the West to do in West Asia.

Only a few weeks earlier, the Norwegian Prime Minister delivering the Lakshman Kadirgamar 2016 memorial lecture spoke on the same SDG theme. Ms. Ema Solberg referred to the importance of the 17 SDGs as the UN’s plan of action for people, peace, prosperity, partnership and the planet – the five Ps. Though Mr. Ban made no reference to areas of the SDGs in which Sri Lanka has made vast strides, Ms. Solberg praised Sri Lanka for achieving at least some of these goals. For instance, accessibility to health and education for both males and females has long been achieved in Sri Lanka. Instead, the UNSG made the startling remark that Sri Lanka needed to regain its rightful place in the region and the international community. The local media wanted to grill him on this at a media conference he held later, but his media boys called the presser off after just four questions were asked.

SDG 5 on gender equality; SDG 7 on affordable and clean energy; SDG 13 on climate change; SDG 14 on conservation of the oceans: SDG 16 on peace and justice – these are some of the UN’s priorities for a better world. These SDGs are a bi-product of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that did not meet their full potential by their target date in 2015. The SDGs now target 2030 but the UN’s call for international co-operation in achieving these goals unfortunately fall flat when bigger nations simply ignore them for their “national interest.” For example, take the rape of the marine resources in the Palk Strait and the Gulf of Mannar by Indian fishermen. It’s a classic instance of the world community, including the UN maintaining a deafening silence when the big nations are in the wrong.

“The 17 SDGs are inter-connected and many of them require cooperation across international borders – that means we will fail or succeed together,” said the Norwegian PM, Co-chair of the UN SDGs advisory group. “In many areas, business as usual will not do,” she added for good measure and referred to her country cooperating in fisheries (SDG 14 deals with the sustainable use of marine resources).

But look at the sheer hypocrisy in international cooperation. The illegal, fishing practices (IUU) adopted by the Indians continue unabated, filling the Treasury coffers of the Tamil Nadu state Government and lining the pockets of the state’s businessmen or politicians with exports to the European Union (EU). In the meantime, the EU takes a holistic view on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) practices against Sri Lankan fishermen and red cards imports from Sri Lanka. It preaches and has its plate full at the same time.

This is why the UN’s otherwise noble goals are often unachievable and of mere academic interest to countries that need its help most. These SDGs refer to children needing schools and childbirth issues, poverty and health, when countries like Syria and much of West Asia, Yemen and parts of Africa are living hells due to wars triggered by the West’s agenda. Tax havens overseas, especially in the West, allow corrupt politicians and third-world tax dodgers who have creamed the fat off their land to stack their loot in their banks and bolster their economies. The UN has been widely blamed for ‘standing and watching’, doing little or nothing while talking of MDGs and SDGs.
While Sri Lanka’s public and private sector embrace the UN’s SDGs, even the UNSG Ban-Ki moon conceded how “hollow” the UN’s grandiloquence can be when the world is at war. And of course, so too, as long as double standards of the West dominate the world order.

Whither strategic studies

While the United Nations Secretary General was speaking in Colombo on peace and the UN’s goals for a better socio-economic-political world, Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe was delivering the keynote address in Singapore on the Global Power Transition in the Indian Ocean organized by several think-tanks across Asia (See ST2 cover page for his speech). This was an important event organized by think-tanks from the Asia-Pacific region, co-hosted by India and Singapore with the 2017 edition to be held in Colombo.

Sirima Bandaranaike’s proposal at the UN General Assembly in 1971 was for an Indian Ocean Zone of Peace. It was an idealist proposal – an illusion. Today, India is interested in revisiting this proposal given the burgeoning Chinese naval presence in these waters and the interest shown by many competing fleets, mainly the United States and Japan. But still, there are no takers.

PM Wickremesinghe took the opportunity to outline Sri Lanka’s pivotal position in this lively Ocean and its balancing line between India, China and Western interests. In his keynote address, he called for an “Indian Ocean Order” with accepted rules to guide interactions between states and having the primary responsibility of upholding the freedom of navigation in the Indian Ocean. He said it should be built on a consensual agreement with no singular state dominating.

This week, the Colombo Defence Seminar was also significant. Though the credentials of some of the foreign speakers were questionable, the topic “Soft Power and Influence on Global issues” was relevant. Soft power is the persuasive approach to international relations through economic and cultural influence. This is in vogue in world affairs where there are no wars (hard power). In November, the Galle Dialogue, an initiative of the former Defence Secretary for fostering strategic maritime partnerships will be held.

These military-strategic studies are a sine quo non for a country like Sri Lanka given our geographic location, buffeted by the ‘soft power’ of competing world powers. How the country’s leaders handle the delicate winds of change will be of the essence.

The Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRSS) was strategized by the former Foreign Minister in whose name the former Institute of Strategic Studies was re-named after his assassination, for this very purpose. The LKIIRSS, an autonomous body under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has however lost its way, falling way short of what was expected of it.

According to the Act that established the LKIIRSS, it was to be a multi-disciplinary research institute dedicated to the study of the strategic interests of Sri Lanka, providing information and data to the Government in relation to issues which may be required as a basis for the formulation and structuring of national policies. How much of the Prime Minister’s keynote address in Singapore had the input of the LKIIRSS? A safe guess would be, nil. Holding workshops and guest speakers or yanking foreign VIPs from the beach when on a private vacation and asking them to deliver memorial lectures is far from what the LKIIRSS is expected to do. In the meantime, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Defence have set up a parallel Institute of National Security Studies. The more think-tanks the merrier one should think, but merrier for whom is the question, if it is not for the benefit of the Government and the country.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

The United Nations Secretary General (UNSG) Ban Ki-moon visits Sri Lanka on Wednesday for what is a virtual farewell call as he completes his term of office at the helm of the 193- nation world body. According to unconfirmed reports he is now a possible contender for the Presidency of his native land, South Korea.

His last visit to Sri Lanka was under different circumstances. Sri Lanka had just ended a military campaign for a separate state; bloody and bruising, it also hurt the pride of Western powers that had wanted the fighting to stop, a call the then Government had refused to heed. The UNSG’s visit came in the backdrop of those harrowing days of 2009 and to say the least, due to pressure from those Western countries. Today, those very countries are grappling with home-grown terrorism, and Sri Lanka seems one of the few safe havens in the world.

The UNSG’s visit in 2009 was to have after-shocks for Sri Lanka in the form of a joint communiqué issued at the time. The then Government of Sri Lanka agreed to set in motion an accountability process for the way its Armed Forces defeated the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) terrorist organisation. This was to set the stage later for a Resolution at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva formalizing a virtual war crimes tribunal – by whatever name one calls it.

The then President was ill-advised that the Western powers would not pursue such a Resolution against Sri Lanka. The setting up of a Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) as an alternative to a ‘war crimes tribunal’ fell short of expectations in Geneva because the then Government did not follow the Commission’s recommendations. It was also too little too late to pacify the West.

In-between, Ban-Ki moon muddied the waters further by appointing a committee, later to be dubbed the Darusman Committee after its chairman, to do its own investigation into what happened during the last stages of the armed insurgency against the state of Sri Lanka. He was up for re-election as UNSG and needed the backing of the Western powers. A UNSG has to ‘play ball’ with the Western powers if he wants to sit on that seat; ask one of his predecessor’s Boutros BoutrosGhali, the Egyptian UNSG who did not get a second term.

Not to be seen as entirely dancing to the tune of the Western powers, Ban-Ki moon said that the Darusman Committee’s findings were merely for his own enlightenment. It was not a formal UN committee. But, he went back on his word and the substantively unsubstantiated findings of the committee were leaked to the UNHRC that was by then prosecuting the state of Sri Lanka in Geneva. He ignored the legitimate protest of the Government of Sri Lanka and took no action against his Assistant SG, an appointee of his, who did the leaking.

Compounding matters was the basis on which the committee members were chosen and the obvious bias they showed in accepting ex-parte evidence not subjected to the test of proof. The credibility of the Darusman Committee members was later exposed. One of them, in particular, Yasmin Sooka of South Africa was seen on pro-LTTE platforms later. The Darusman Committee report became a handy whip against the state of Sri Lanka and Ban-Ki moon has to take the personal rap for this.

This was a time when Sri Lanka’s foreign policy was in a shambles; antagonising India and the West, losing votes at the UNHRC; fast becoming a fiefdom of China, nepotism reigning supreme in appointments domestically, and High Commissioners getting slapped by Monitoring MPs at restaurant bars in New York. It was a time the Government’s left hand did not know what the right hand was doing. Having derided the Darusman Report home as illegitimate, a secret delegation was sent to meet the committee at the UN headquarters in New York to argue Sri Lanka’s case, thereby legitimizing it. What bungling!

The United Nations political standing has been severely eroded in recent years. Its apex Security Council is seen by many around the world as a mere rubber-stamp endorsing the West’s global agenda; it is a testament to the UN’s failures in maintaining world peace. Selectively pursuing human rights abuses and grave violations, and the killing of non-combatants, including children and the destruction of property in war theatres but exempting the West’s NATO or NATO allied forces committing the same crimes as reported daily from Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya and other countries, the UN is under scrutiny. There are no Darusman Committees sent by the UNSG to these bleeding hot-spots.
What has the UNSG to say about the R2P (Right to Protect) concept mooted during the period of his predecessor, by Western powers to get a foothold in sovereign nations not tocing their line? Did the UN factor in the culpability of bigger countries destabilising smaller states in the first place? Take the case of India’s intervention in Sri Lanka.This triggered the military campaign for a separate state on this island-nation for three decades. The UN maintained a deafening silence all along.

Is not the Palestinian problem, the tragic sore festering in the world for the past seven decades with injustice, poverty, bondage and human rights violations rampant. Why has the UN outsourced the solving of this problem to the US, which given the influential Jewish lobby in America, can hardly be an ‘honest broker’?

While the UN has displayed its partisanship on the political front – the UNHRC Resolution on Sri Lanka being a textbook case, the organization nor Ban-Ki moon has been entirely a disaster to the world. One has only to imagine a world without the UN to comprehend what it would otherwise be. This is an imperfect world and there are no level playing-fields. That is in Utopia, not on planet Earth. It is somewhat like religion. Despite wars fought in the name of religion, imagine a world without religion, whatever the Rationalists may say. And with issues like climate change creeping up on humanity, who would coordinate the fight against it.

The ‘good side’ of the UN gets little kudos — the several agencies of the UN that do immense work outside the political arena. Sri Lanka has played its part in the organisation over the years. Our UN Ambassador ShirleyAmerasinghe was a shining example having chaired the Law of the Sea Conference and GamaniCorea heading UNCTAD was no second. A host of other Sri Lankans have served in these specialized agencies providing their expertise to the world community. Sri Lanka has punched above its weight by way of human resources and expertise to the UN and right now, the irony is that its Army plays a significant role in the UN Peace Keeping Forces in the world’s troubled areas even as the conduct of this same Army is being questioned by another UN agency.

President MaithripalaSirisena leaves for the UN General Assembly sessions in New York next month after the UNSG’s visit. Last year, he was feted as a ‘conquering hero’ by Western leaders who had assembled in that city for defeating an anti-West Government in Sri Lanka, but the UNHRC’s Geneva Resolution sponsored by those very countries continues to hang like the Sword of Damocles over this country.

This editorial was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

So Nisha Biswal, the US State Department’s point person on Sri Lanka, says that Sri Lanka could be another Singapore.

That will be the day. If after six visits to the country in 20 months she has still not grasped the basics of Sri Lanka’s socio-political culture and mores, the lack of respect for law and order and the rule of law infused by political interference and intimidation, she could hardly be a messenger of hope and good sense.

Nisha Biswal told a group of Sri Lankan business leaders that Lee Kuan Yew wanted to model his country on Ceylon and now it is time for Sri Lanka to be turned into a Singapore

The other day media carried a picture of our over-zealous foreign minister holding on to the hand of the visiting Chinese foreign minister leaving the latter looking rather perplexed. The Chinese reaction was not surprising given that the pro-western UNP leadership turned its back on Beijing shortly after the “good governance” coalition came to office possibly because China provided financial help to the Rajapaksa government when our so-called western friends would not do so and even refused to provide weaponry to fight an insurgency.

But now that the pro-western UNP finds itself in a financial mess it has no qualms about kowtowing and publicly displaying a willingness to accept its financial help with open arms and empty money bags.

An occasional peck on both cheeks might be considered by some in our diplomatic fraternity as a sign of undying friendship and gratitude. But in the world of diplomacy such over-familiarity especially in public might not always win friends and influence nations.

Speaking to a group of Sri Lankan business leaders during her recent visit, Nisha Biswal said that Singapore’s one time prime minister Lee Kuan Yew had wanted to model his country on Ceylon at the time. But now it is time for Sri Lanka to be turned into a Singapore.

Does Biswal believe that Sri Lankans are gullible or is this an insidious move to make this strategically-located nation an integral cog in Washington’s pivot to Asia policy intended to stymie China’s economic and military advance westward in the Indian Ocean?

If Biswal was even faintly aware of the bedrock on which the nascent Southeast Asian city-state was built she would not be proposing that we turn ourselves into a soulless nation however economically advanced and rich it has turned out to be.

I do not know whether Biswal has met Lee Kuan Yew when he was leading his newly independent state and talked to him. I have when I was working in Hong Kong and Mr. Lee visited the then British colony for a major conference.

So meticulous was the Singaporean he was able to tell me what I had called him in some of my writings – a dictator, an autocrat and a politician who did not tolerate dissent.

He did not entirely disagree but he carefully adduced reasons why he had to act the way he did, to craft a policy framework for a majority Chinese population sandwiched between two huge Malay-dominated nations. He said even Singapore’s language policy was determined by this geopolitical consideration.

Mr. Lee said that when Singapore was heading for independence Ceylon was the model on which he hoped to build the emergent state. Ceylon had a high rate of literacy, an educated people with a good educational system, an efficient civil service, a well-functioning judiciary and a performing economy.

But all these important qualities that made the Ceylonese nation were dissipated and destroyed by over-bearing and obtrusive politics. In later years when his people asked him for democratic rights and political freedoms he asked them whether they wanted to be another Sri Lanka involved in ethnic conflict.

Those who know the real Singapore story – I nearly went to work there when the editor of a new newspaper scheduled for launch invited me to join – how Ceylon born J.B. Jeyaretnam, the only opposition MP was treated (or mistreated) after he entered parliament after several attempts, how several journalists suffered including a friend of mine on the Business Times, Kenneth James, for ‘offences’ that most journalists would have considered normal professional duties.

Space does not permit an elaboration of the restrictions Singapore places on its citizens including the use of laws that a public gathering of five persons or more requires a police permit and charges of contempt of court, criminal and civil defamation and sedition are used to rein in government critics.

Human Rights Watch in its World Report 2015 states that the “Singapore’s government limits political and civil rights—especially freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association—using overly broad legal provisions on security, public order, morality, and racial and religious harmony.”

Admittedly some advances have been made – however meager – in the way of democratic freedoms. But the Singapore that Biswal and others speak of glowingly was not build on democratic foundations and the rights and freedoms associated with a free society.

So is Biswal then asking Sri Lanka to dismantle the constitutional and other rights guaranteed to its people, the democratic political system that took root even before independence in 1948 and the free press that politicians unfailingly promise the country?

I dare say Sri Lanka can well do without the corrosive and corrupt politics practiced today by many equally corrupt and abrasive politicians. If a nuclear destruction of the existing political system was possible that would certainly be for the betterment of the country.

Is Biswal able to provide such purifying political cleansing that is surely needed if Sri Lanka is to become another Singapore? Despite the democratic deficit that marks Singapore’s years of independence, it was able to achieve an enviable economic record because there were certain prerequisites that its leaders laid down.

Singapore was founded on meritocracy where only the best entered public service and other institutions and followed professional careers. Equally corruption was stamped on wherever it appeared and the guilty were shown no mercy.

Respect for law and order was inculcated in the populace and those who violated the law paid for it. That was the social order that produce Singapore’s economic miracle and a people who called themselves Singaporeans rather than by their ethnicity.

Moreover the city-state has had a political leadership that placed the country before self and was truly committed to building a prosperous society where the majority of its people were able to lead a comfortable life.

The reverse is surely true of Sri Lanka. Why talk of meritocracy when some of those who occupy official positions probably do not know what it means, where relatives, friends and acolytes are handpicked and planted in jobs for which the public pays. The qualified are deposited in the closest dust bin because they do not belong to the correct party, have not paid pooja to the presiding almighty and have sought to expose corruption and abuse or to indulge in it.

How could we build a meritocracy which is what Singapore has done, if a fundamental principle on which Sri Lankan politics is founded is nepotism and clannishness which this government promised to eliminate but practices with the same vigour as its predecessor?

The promises that the current government made to introduce “good governance” have been shattered long before the first year of this National Unity Government has ended. A classic recent example is the admission in parliament by the Higher Education and Highways Minister Lakshman Kiriella that he recruited 45 persons as consultants to the Southern Transport Development Project of the Road Development Authority at Rs.65,000 a month. If the highest qualification most of them have is the “O” level or some even lower how are they qualified to be consultants and consulted on what?

Lakshman Kiriella, who is increasing becoming an embarrassment to the UNP, admitted they were given these jobs because they helped in bringing his party into power. Whoever consults these unqualified consultants should seek psychiatric assistance.

It was not long ago that he wrote letters to two university authorities seeking to influence the appointment of persons known to him.

Just a few days ago I saw an article in which the writer says that the High Post Committee had advertised in newspaper calling for public comments on three persons whose names were listed for particular appointments.

It seemed that these three persons, one of whom is the President’s brother, was already functioning in those posts and have been doing so for some time. If the story is true then somebody should remind this committee of the bolting horses and the stable door.

So this is the country that Biswal wants to turn into another prosperous Singapore. Either she knows little of what she is talking about or is deliberately trying to sell these ideas to drag Sri Lanka into a tighter embrace with Washington so we will loosen our ties with China.

If this is the kind of rubbish that visiting diplomats oozing with spurious bon homie, lecture us about we could well do without it.

Before she comes here next and the Foreign Minister rushes to offer another handshake she should rid herself of the mental sloth that characterizes her advice.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

PARIS, AFP – When Dolly the cloned sheep was born 20 years ago on July 5, many hailed mankind’s new-found mastery over DNA as a harbinger of medical miracles such as lab-grown transplant organs.

Others trembled at the portent of a “Brave New World” of identical humans farmed for spare parts or as cannon fodder.

As it turns out, neither came to pass.

Human cloning — complicated, risky and ethically contentious — has largely been replaced as the holy grail of regenerative medicine by other technologies, say experts.

“It has not lived (up) to the hype,” said Rosario Isasi of the University of Miami’s Institute for Bioethics and Health Policy.

“It was like a eureka moment: that we will finally be able to understand more (about) the mechanisms of disease, be able to maybe use it as a treatment for infertility,” she told AFP. “But that has not happened.” Arguably the world’s most famous sheep, Dolly was the first mammal cloned using a technique called somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT).

It involves removing the DNA-containing nucleus of a cell other than an egg or sperm — a skin cell, for example — and implanting it into an unfertilised egg from which the nucleus has been removed.

In Dolly’s case, the gene-encoding cell was taken from a mammary gland, which saw the ewe named for buxom country singer Dolly Parton.

Once transferred, the egg reprogrammes the mature DNA back to an embryonic state with the aid of an electric jolt, and starts dividing to form a single-parent embryo.

No human is known to ever have been created in this way.

– Slippery slope – ================== Cloning as a human reproductive technique is a global no-no.

Apart from ethical and human rights objections raised to the creation of carbon-copy people, safety is a key concern. In animals, only a handful of cloned embryos survive to birth, and many have health problems later.

Experts say moral opposition to cloning as a means of reproduction, has clouded opinion on the technique’s potential usefulness in regenerative medicine.

Mainly, people fear that scientists will not be able to resist the temptation of playing God.

“With the ethical safeguards in place, there’s… no way to go into reproductive applications,” insisted Isasi.

Yet, many people “fear that slippery slope… that one thing leads to another, leads to another, until there is a bad result.

“That’s the main concern. That is probably what has held back the use of the technology.” Investment in therapeutic cloning research has dwindled, and few countries — among them Belgium, China, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Britain, Singapore — allow the creation of embryos for experimentation.

In the United States it is not explicitly illegal.

In therapeutic cloning, scientists harvest stem cells from a very early-stage embryo — called a blastocyst — a hollow ball of about 100-200 cells.

Coaxing these “blank”, juvenile cells into specialised liver or blood cells, for example, holds the promise of curing disease or repairing damaged organs.

If grown from the patient’s own DNA, the risk of transplant rejection is dramatically lowered.

But producing stem cells this way involves destroying embryos, another moral quagmire.

And while a handful of scientists have succeeded in creating stem cells through SCNT, none have been grown into a functional human organ.

– ‘Human cloning will disappear’ – ============================== Cloning may not have found a direct application in medicine, but it has yielded many spinoff technologies, experts say.

“The whole field has moved to IPS cell research,” pointed out Julian Savulescu, who heads Oxford University’s Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics.

Induced pluripotent (IP) stem cells are created by stimulating mature, already specialised, cells back into a juvenile state — basically cloning without the need for an embryo.

The Nobel-capped discovery is the new focus in regenerative medicine focused, though the jury is out as to whether IP stem cells work as well as embryonic ones.

Another spinoff is mitochondrial gene transfer, a new way of planting parental DNA into a healthy egg to create an embryo free of harmful mutations carried by the mother.

Aaron Levine, a bioethicist at Georgia Tech, said cloning’s biggest impact on human health is likely to come from animals raised to produce organs, tissue or biological drugs that will not be rejected by the human immune system.

“I think human cloning will disappear,” he said.

“I think there’s just not ultimately enough demand, not enough that you can do through cloning that you can’t do through other things. “

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

The IMF Extended Fund Facility (EFF) of US$ 1.5 billion with an agreement on an economic program supported by the IMF is now imminent. This could be a turning point in the economic fortunes of the country. The IMF facility would replenish the reserves, add confidence in the economy and have a salutary effect on capital inflows.

In as much as the loan is vital for getting the country out of the current critical balance of payments crisis, the commitment to the suggested economic reform program is essential to stabilise the economy and lay the foundation for a high trajectory of economic growth. The suggested corrective measures by ensuring fiscal discipline and prudent fiscal and monetary policies could get the country out of the current crisis, restore economic stability and provide the conditions for rapid economic growth.

IMF statement
The IMF statement of April 11th points towards the IMF granting a facility of US$ 1.5 billion with agreement on an economic program supported by the IMF. While the IMF agreement on the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) is not a fait accompli, the tenor and thrust of the statement leaves little doubt that it will be granted after the on going Annual Spring Meetings of the IMF Board and the discussions that are currently taking place in Washington D.C. between the IMF and the Sri Lankan authorities.

Economic recovery
The loan facility and the concomitant economic reform program could usher an economic recovery. The government must however have the political resolve to implement the associated economic reforms that are vital to strengthen the fiscal position, foreign exchange reserves and balance of payments.

Objectives
The broad objectives of the proposed economic program, according to the IMF, is to achieve “high and sustained levels of inclusive economic growth, restore discipline to macroeconomic and financial policies, and rebuild fiscal and reserve buffers.” The IMF identifies the key objectives underlying the reform agenda as improving revenue administration and tax policy; strengthening public financial management; reform of state enterprises; and structural reforms to enable a more outward-looking economy, deepen foreign exchange markets, and strengthen financial sector supervision.

Tax reform
One of the weakest features of the Sri Lankan economy is the low collection of government revenue. The revenue to GDP ratio has declined over the years from around 20 per cent of GDP to only 12 per cent, despite average annual GDP growth of around 7 per cent in recent years. This tax to GDP ratio is too low for the country’s level of per capita income. Countries with similar per capita incomes gather more than 20 per cent of GDP as revenue.

The low revenue collection results in high fiscal deficits and accumulation of public debt and leaves inadequate fiscal space for education, health and infrastructure development. The foreign funded high cost of infrastructure development in 2010-2014 has been the main reason for doubling of foreign indebtedness.

The reduction of the fiscal deficit is vital for economic stability. The IMF economic reform program lays considerable emphasis on fiscal consolidation. Its objective is “A durable reduction of the fiscal deficit and public debt through a growth-friendly emphasis on revenue generation.”

The cabinet has, according to the IMF statement, decided to reduce the 2016 fiscal deficit to 5.4 per cent of GDP. Although this is inadequate, it may be a realistic target. The government should take steps to achieve a fiscal deficit of 3.5 per cent of GDP in 2020 as targeted in the Prime Minister’s Economic Policy Statement of November 2015.

Strategy
The IMF strategy to increase revenue consists of broadening the tax base by reducing tax exemptions and introduction of a new Inland Revenue Act. The medium term revenue effort will be based on further reform of tax and expenditure policies, modernizing revenue administration and public financial management by implementation of key IT systems.

Pragmatic tax measures
Tax exemptions, tax avoidance and tax evasion are widespread endemic features. An effective tax system must take into account the inefficiency and corruption that prevails. The IMF proposals are essentially medium term and based on the assumption of an effective administration. New tax measures should be unavoidable and certain of collection such as withholding taxes and license fees. Otherwise the good intentions of curtailing tax evasion and tax avoidance would remain a delusion. Tax exemptions are easier to remove if the government is determined to not permit discretionary exemptions.

State enterprises
The other important economic reform that has been mooted is “a clear strategy to define and address outstanding obligations of state enterprises”. The colossal losses of state enterprises have been a heavy burden on the public finances. The reform of these enterprises is vital to redeeming the public finances. Drastic reforms, including the privatisation or part privatisation of some state owned enterprises are imperative. Will the government have the political will and courage to implement a privatisation program as was done by Chandrika Bandaranaike‘s government.

Reserves
The IMF loan facility will strengthen the country’s diminished reserves and add considerable international confidence in the Sri Lankan economy. The enhanced international confidence in the Sri Lankan economy would stem capital outflows and reduce the cost of international borrowing. As the Governor of the Central Bank, Arjuna Mahendran has stated “Depending on the success of the Extended Fund Facility with the IMF on which discussions are currently underway in Washington D.C. other global lending agencies will look at us much more favourably in the coming months.” He also said that the People’s Bank of China has given authorization to issue bonds in China in renminbi the official Chinese currency and that all these would enable the raising of US$ 3 billion at lower interest rates quite easy.

Concluding reflections
The expected IMF facility of US$ 1.5 billion will replenish the reserves and add confidence in the economy. This would have a beneficial impact on capital inflows. The corrective measures by the IMF of ensuring fiscal discipline and prudent fiscal and monetary policies are essential to get out of the crisis and restore economic stability and create conditions for higher investment and rapid growth.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

In our student days there was a commonly used Sinhala phrase – “clean suit empty pocket”. That succinctly conveyed the image of a well-clad individual without a cent on his person.

If this pithy Sinhala phrase came to mind last week it is on reading three news reports that suggest that empty pockets do not stop our politicians and officials who cling to them like blood-sucking leaches, conducting themselves as though this country is so richly endowed that we can spend at will without the qualms of a disturbed conscience.

What is so disgusting and regrettable about this approach of the big spender is that those responsible for doing so are the very people who promised before the January 2015 presidential election and the parliamentary elections of August the same year that they would act prudently, that they would eliminate waste, that they would prune the cabinet and other ministerial positions and transparency would underlie all their public actions.

Now, 15 months after a president was installed and eight months after a National Unity Government (NUG) took office those promises and pledges are nothing but tattered remnants and the public increasingly the victims of what they perceive as political chicanery.

It is disturbing how the political climate has changed. The public enthusiasm that manifested itself after the presidential election during which I was in Colombo had waned when I returned to Colombo last September. With a new government in power there still seemed to be public hope that at least some of the promises would be fulfilled and not discarded within a few months.

When I returned to Colombo a month ago public faith had dissipated. Those who had enthusiastically canvassed, supported and voted for a new President because they wanted a change and believed that the common candidate would engage in radical reform as his platform demeanour and commitment seemed to indicate, were very vocal in their denunciation of the political let down. The seeming sincerity that won votes had vanished like a discarded face mask.

Since my early secondary school days I have followed the vicissitudes of Sri Lanka politics. In that time I have yet to see such a change in public mood and sentiment – from hope to despair.

If the Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Thera who led the movement that called for the establishment of clean and responsible government, is said to have passed away disillusioned and possibly embittered at the turn of events as some claim, it is surely a sign that his vision of a new Sri Lanka ruled by honest and dedicated men and women had been quickly discarded by those who had faithfully promised so much.

The more the public that pinned their faith on the creation of a new environment in governance and Sri Lanka’s political culture follows the daily occurrences in the country the more they feel the essential truth of that French saying “plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose” – the more it changes the more it remains the same.

In recent months the public have been told by the Prime Minister and other knowledgeable members of the government that financial profligacy by the previous government has not only created a balance of payments crisis but also that the country faces a fiscal deficit.

Hence new taxes, direct and indirect have been imposed on a public already burdened by a cost of living that is making life virtually unbearable for a wide section of the populace.

The fact that little was left standing of Finance Minister Karunanayake’s 2016 budget and an interim budget had to be introduced in March to try and offset this fiscal deficit is proof of the crisis.

This newspaper’s economic analyst Dr. Nimal Sanderatne wrote a couple of months back: “The tough question facing the government is whether collectively it is ready to take the necessary steps to increase revenue and to cut back on government spending by a process of rationalisation that could call for curtailment of public enterprises that are soaking in government revenue.”

But instead of cutting back on government spending, the government seems more determined to go on spending sprees as though money is plucked from trees that presidential sibling now heading Sri Lanka Telecom, was looking after when he was managing the Timber Corporation.

The three news reports referred to above relate to uncontrolled or uncontrollable government spending. • The Rs.15 million a month office space rented by the Ministry of Agriculture costing Rs.958 m for five years.

An estimated Rs.30 million allocated for a one-day conference for farmers organized by the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources Management.

• Three more appointments of State and Deputy Ministers now approaching the century mark.
Does the Agriculture Ministry require such expensive office space in seemingly luxurious buildings in Colombo when some of that money could be more profitably spent on improving facilities in the rural areas that actually produce the food the country needs.

It is the farming areas that need attention and resources. In mid 1960s and early 70s the Daily News devoted much space to reporting and writing on agriculture which came in for quite some praise from then Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake.

I often visited agricultural research stations in the country such as Maha Illuppallama, Batalagoda, the two research centres in Gannoruwa highlighting their work and spending some days with farming communities reporting on the difficulties faced by farmers thus focusing public and official attention.

Some of those reports were even raised in parliament and corrective measures swiftly taken.
The point here is that the ministry was located in a rather dilapidated building at the bottom of Union Place almost opposite the YWCA. The then ministers M.D.Banda and Felix Dias Bandaranaike backed by highly dedicated officials – one of whom was Gamini Seneviratne of the former civil service one of few still around – will recall those early days.

Those ministers and officials did not sit on ceremony. They sat not in air conditioned offices but in offices that today senior public officials would shun for their comfort seems the priority.

Would it not be more sensible to spend those millions on developing agriculture in the rural areas and helping those struggling farmers than renting out premises at rates which the Auditor General points out exceeds the government valuation for a square foot of space by Rs.17.50 each.

A government that promised transparency before it took office should go public and announce who owns this building so that an interested public might look into how it came to pass that this expensive property with conditions that benefit the owner/s was rented and whether tenders were called as is the normal practice. Let the promised transparency prevail.

Besides two badly written statements including a brief speech to the F.A.O conference in Rome, Agriculture Minister Duminda Dissanayake’s ministry website announces what it called the Wadduwa Declaration on a national agricultural policy.

The first undertaking given in this declaration promises the “doing away with the shortage of officers by filling vacancies.”

Does one really need a declaration announced as though it sounded like the ten commandments to do what is routinely expected of a state institution – filling vacancies. Why should it take a major conference held in a Wadduwa Hotel to come up with the obvious?

Surely the necessary officers could be appointed if the ministry diverted some of the massive monthly rent it has agreed to pay over five years to the filling of vacancies by persons committed to helping farmers and not political stooges with little knowledge of the undertaking.

Not to be outdone by an allied state institution, the Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources Management organised a one-day conference for farmers which was initially estimated to cost Rs.31 m but appears to have been reduced by Rs.10 million after this charade was exposed.

For an institution whose task includes water resource management it seems somewhat hazy on managing allocating Rs 480,000 for what it calls “water bottles” which I suppose were not empty as implied by the said item.

“We prepared the basic estimate draft to keep the event within a budget framework,” the Director General of the Irrigation Department is quoted as saying, whatever that means

With the power shortage and intermittent power cuts still possible and consumers asked to save on electricity using it only when and where necessary this one-day conference was to cost rupees eight million for lighting etc. This is how state institutions ignore the warnings that the public are asked to abide by.

Unfortunately space does not permit further elucidation but one cannot end without commenting on the recent additions to ministerial ranks. This country was promised a cabinet of 25 which then increased to 38 with signs of more to come.

Today we are nearing the stratosphere. One of the charges made against the Rajapaksa clan and its acolytes was the abuse of state finances and how this will be corrected through good governance and transparent conduct in the interests of the nation.

How does the utterly unprincipled expansion of ministerial posts serve the national interest? Surely the perks and privileges attached to such appointments only increase the cost to state and not a reduction.

Is it the national interest that is being served or the personal desire of leaders trying to consolidate their tenuous hold on power by distributing state assets to kith, kin and unprincipled politicians ignoring their own preachings on thanha.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

There is no such thing as a free Chinese takeaway; and, if the visiting Lankan high powered delegation led by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe fancied otherwise, the Chinese hosts made pretty certain the guests got the message crystal clear when the fortune cookie, opened after the diplomatic feast of niceties was over, revealed the thumping bill of fare.

FRIENDS AGAIN BUT ON WHAT TERMS?: Visiting Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe with China’s President Xi Jinping at Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday.

“Currently, the China-funded constructions in Pakistan cannot serve as a strong foothold for China, given the calamitous state of Pakistan’s security. Sri Lanka can be of great importance for China in the security strategic layout in the Indian Ocean. It will not only provide security assurances for nearby navigation channels, but will also promote the 21st Maritime Silk Road,” the Globe Times stated on the day the Lankan Prime Minister was to kick of his begging mission in Beijing where he was expected to ask the Chinese government to waive off certain loans and restructure some of the $8 billion Chinese debt.

This was the first time that Beijing had underscored its concerns and publicly made plain that its interest in Lanka went beyond mere trade gains. There was no mistaking the siren blare of the Chinese government authorised report when it stated the great importance of Lanka for China in ‘the security strategic layout in the Indian Ocean’. This was not a Chinese takeaway but a Chinese takeover. To further her strategic security aims in the region, China will provide assistance was the underlining message. With the Lankans’ clamour for alms rising in Tiananmen Square, China conveyed through its print media what it expected as its quid pro quo. They knew they had Lanka by the short and curlies.

The Chinese have memories as long their great wall. The pre presidential election anti China rhetoric soured relations once sweet. During the presidential election campaign the then opposition politicians successfully appealed to national sentiments by creating the vista of how the Rajapaksa government had sold the country lock, stock and barrel to the Chinese for a song in order to remain in power.

They pointed to the non functional Hambantota Port which had been built with Chinese aid and painted it as a future Chinese naval base to further China’s ‘String of Pearls’ policy in the Indian Ocean to gain regional hegemony. They pointed to the non operational Mattala Airport – again built with Chinese aid and situated only a few miles from the Hambantota harbour – and tarred it as a future Chinese Military Air base. They pointed to the exorbitant costs of the roads and highways built with Chinese aid and claimed the Rajapaksa regime members were lining their pockets with millions of dollars by inflating the project expenditure with Chinese collusion.

And then they directed the nation’s attention to the Colombo Port City, the US$ 1.4 billion project funded by the Chinese to claim 233 hectares of land from the sea and Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s arbitrary decision to give 88 hectares of it on a lease for 99 years and a further 20 hectares to be given on freehold to be owned by the Chinese in perpetuity. This, they pointed out most persuasively, was a sell out of Lanka’s sovereignty: The ultimate Rajapaksa treachery.

Two weeks before he became Prime Minister under the Maithripala government Ranil Wickremesinghe pledged to scrap the Port City Project, China’s biggest investment in Lanka. China was tainted with the Rajapaksa grime and any association with her was to be kept at arms’ length lest it soil the nation’s new suit of American bespoke tailoring. Lankan eyes which had squinted furtively at the West for five years now stared direct and ogle-eyed; and blinkered their vision to Eastern light.

Thus with Lanka beginning to conduct herself in a manner that made her once more the darling of the West and the pin up girl of India, the dalliance with China had to come to an end. Or it had to be ostensibly shown to the world that China had got the heave ho, had been given the boot.

But geopolitical reality also meant the superpower of the region China, with the second largest economy in the world and the world’s most populous state, could not be ignored at the drop of a hat. The mega projects begun under Chinese patronage and funded by Chinese capital could not be abandoned totally. The massive loans obtained by the government of Lanka could not be unilaterally revoked, liability denied and payment defaulted.

Though politics had demanded an initial anti Chinese sentiment to be expressed to pacify the troubled paranoia of India, the penurious state of the Treasury’s coffers, the depletion of the nation’s foreign currency levels and the plight of those who had worked at the now suspended Chinese mega projects which were politically exploited by the straggling opposition led by the people deposed former president in his campaign to return to power, could not be ignored. Economic and geopolitical reality demanded that genuflection had to be paid to China once more, whatever the political rhetoric may have been during the first few weeks of the post election euphoria.

But before the penitent tramps the hard ground to Beijing with begging bowl in hand to the door of a friend he once scorned, whose help he now seeks, the dried up soil of goodwill must first be watered, must first be softened and made ready for prostration to expurgate past sins. In February two top UNP ministers, both of them Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s closest confidantes, namely Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Minister Samarawickrema and Law and Order and Southern Region Development Minister Sagala Ratnayake, headed a senior delegation to China.

Minister Malik Samarawickrema returning from China last month announced some of the highpoints of his visit. He said that the Government has sought new loans from China to carry out various projects Government proposes and to set up a joint venture with China to develop the Mattala International Airport and the Chinese investors will have a say in the operation of the Mattala Airport operations. He also said the Government had sought financial co-operation to implement several of the projects in the pipeline and that projects have been outlined and China’s support had been sought on funding. Furthermore, joint ventures had been proposed between the two sides to develop the Hambantota Port and the Mattala Airport and that the Port City project will proceed with the original agreement to reclaim 233 hectares of land from the sea and work will soon resume.

All in all, China had been awarded everything she had asked for. But it appears that, while hiding her ire behind the bamboo curtain of oriental charm and discretion, she wants more, which, as the report in China’s Globe Times indicate, may possibly include demands that verge on infringing Lanka’s sovereignty.

The giant panda had borne every irksome slap but knowing the ways of the world with more than five thousand years of history behind it, had waited with legendary patience for beggared Lanka to come crawling to its feet to extract the maximum for her pauperised impotent state. Lanka has gone carrying with her naught but the weight of vilifications hurled against the regional superpower and now the contemptuous Chinaman is demanding his pound of flesh in return. That is the price Lanka must pay for lacking a far sighted, coherent and credible foreign policy.

As China’s President Xi Jinping said on Friday, “the Chinese government only considers Sri Lankan people and its policies and not personalities and political parties when assisting Sri Lanka and a third party cannot harm the friendship between Sri Lanka and China.” That’s a valuable lesson Lanka must learn that only the permanent interests of the nation must dictate foreign policy.

Unlike many nations in the world, Sri Lanka still hasn’t gained the political maturity to realise the value of having a long term foreign policy formulated in the best long term interests of the nation.

Instead the country’s foreign policy has often been decided on an ad hoc basis and has often depended on the passing whims of its political leaders in power; and has often been dictated to by what was most politically expedient at that relevant time.

After the end of the thirty year long terrorist war in 2009, Lanka’s foreign policy took a paradigm shift. And this was to move away from India’s sphere of influence and look to China for succour. This was done not because the country’s long term interest so demanded it but because the short term interest of Lankan President Rajapaksa whose political survival depended on it, so compelled it.

The abandonment of its traditional ally and closest neighbour India and the attendant hostility of the West such a drastic movement invoked, coupled with the West’s professed concern over the Lankan government’s nonchalant approach and arrogant attitude to human rights violations and its intransigence to display transparency and accept accountability to war crimes allegedly committed by its armed forces during the last days of the terrorist war soon led to Lanka’s isolation; and the subsequent unofficial branding of Lanka as an international pariah state exiled from the community of civilised nations.

The island nation, with its anti Indian, anti West stance, had no friend in the world except the region’s superpower aspirant China. The interests coincided and the resurrection of the historical Sino-Lanka relationship proved once again to be of mutual benefit to both parties. In other words, it was the ideal basis for a lasting friendship – in normal times.

But these were not normal times; and while China could afford to indulge it and gain a foothold in the strategically placed Indian Ocean island which had been a major hub and port of call in the Silk Route hundreds of years ago, Lanka soon found the crippling measures taken by the rest of the unfriendly world threatening her very economic survival.

True, China had the pockets deep enough to finance mega projects in Lanka and the ability to extend millions of dollars in credit lines. She had a permanent seat in the United Nation’s Security Council and thus could veto any vote to place worldwide economic embargoes against Lanka.

But though the Yuan kept the Lankan economy afloat and built her roads and created the impression of vast development taking place in Lanka to impress the citizenry and keep the Rajapaksa regime politically stable; though China’s veto vote in the UN enabled the Rajapaksa regime to drag their feet when it came to answering the international community’s demand for human rights accountability in the confidence that the UN could not do their worst without Chinese acquiescence; yet the fact remained that the West and India were Lanka’s biggest customers and could individually impose their own trade sanctions with crippling effect.

China’s role, which had propped up the Rajapaksa regime and cocooned it from western vengeance, also in the end contributed to the downfall of Mahinda Rajapaksa from his Chinese built pedestal of presidential existence. His ousting by the Lankan electorate earned for the nation the goodwill of the international community. America, which had publicly announced she wished to see a regime change in Lanka, applauded and cheered Lanka’s return to democracy. India rejoiced and hailed the people of Lankan for their wise decision and welcomed the nation back into the familiar family fold.

One year later a new foreign policy is evolving not at its natural Foreign Ministry dwelling but at the Prime Minister’s office to where it had been transferred. In January this year the Prime Minister appointed a new body under his authority called the Global Affairs Committee headed by Charitha Ratwatte, a former Treasury Secretary and currently a senior Advisor to the Prime Minister, to oversee the working of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and to give directions on foreign policy and all related matters.

It appears to have recognised that though the West had been profuse in its praise for Lanka and had liberally hailed the new playing field of politics, cheered the return to democracy, appreciated the willingness to entertain a war crimes probe even with international judges, admired the independence of the judiciary, valued the upholding of human rights, it had remained tight fisted and had stinted when it came to meaningfully assisting Lanka in terms of dollars and euros. There concern for Lanka had come to reflect the acronym of their US-European North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. NATO: No Aid Talk Only.

Thus in these last few months the realisation has dawned in the echelons of power that it is time to do business with China again. That merely to satisfy Western aspirations that Lanka cannot look askance at the regional superpower. That to align with the West totally would be to commit the same fundamental mistake the previous regime made by aligning exclusively with China. The time has come,perhaps, to return to the ideals of non-alignment, the self same principles which moved Lanka to become one of the original members of the Non Aligned Movement in 1961, and to woo China with gusto.

Today the wheel seems to have turned full circle and China seems to be on track with her famous virtue of patience justly and amply rewarded. Though historically the Chinese have been noted to think in terms of centuries, even they must agree in wonderment that with Lanka, what a world of difference a year makes.

The Lankan Government appears to have finally come to terms that even at the risk of antagonising India, the dominant position of China as an emerging world power cannot be ignored or trifled with. It would have taken into cognizance that she is a superpower in the region, the most populous state with nearly 1.4 billion people; the second largest country by land area; the world’s largest exporter and the largest importer; the second largest economy in the world; a permanent member of the United Nation’s Security Council with the all important veto vote; and currently a member of the UN Human Rights Commission till the end of this year.

But this is not done at the cost of India’s friendship. The same strategy of accommodation is being followed when it comes to the new trade agreement that India is pushing for Lanka to sign. Called the Lanka Economic and Technology Co-operation Agreement (ETCA), the Government’s plans to sign it have met stiff opposition from the public, including lawyers and doctors, who fear loss of employment with an Indian influx of manpower. But the Prime Minister has shown that he is prepared to weather the local storm and this has won for him the goodwill of the Indian Government and perhaps allowed him an opportunity to persuade India that in return the Lankan Government’s decision to allow the Port City Project and other Chinese projects should be viewed with understanding and not opposed.

What emerges from recent political and diplomatic activity accompanied as it is by backchannel discussions and understandings reached, is that Lanka’s evolving foreign policy now looks set to charter a course that seeks to balance Indian and Chinese interests with greater understanding and with greater accommodation, expecting the same in return from the countries concerned to help Lanka emerge from the ashes of a thirty year war and a ten year misrule riddled with unprecedented corruption. As China’s grand progenitor of culture the great Sage Confucius say:” They must often change, who would be constant in happiness or wisdom.”

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka

The world was shaken up this week with the leaks of the ‘Panama Papers’ exposing the financial shenanigans of world leaders, past and present. They showed how such leaders of men, women and nations and their business side-kicks hid their embezzled wealth in tax havens around the world and thereby avoided paying taxes in their respective countries. They enjoyed the good life with their monies stacked in offshore banks, some using shell companies with front-men as the account holders, while their fellow countrymen and women were asked to pay their taxes.

This was an instance of cross-border journalism taken to a new level. A ‘whistleblower’ first providing a German newspaper with the original leak; the newspaper then contacting the New York-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) for assistance, and after two years of research by a team of as many as 400 journalists worldwide poring over an incredible 11.5 million internal documents and 2.6 terabytes of data spanning 40 years, more data than the Wikileaks that exposed US diplomatic messages, the Snowden Intelligence files, the Luxembourg tax files and the HSBC files combined — came up with these astounding revelations.

It was a stupendous achievement in journalism – a new version of Watergate – and a great embarrassment to political leaders worldwide. It has blown the lid off hidden wealth and corruption in countries across the globe even though some of these companies and accounts are legitimate ones.

Heads have already begun to roll, while others are fighting with their backs to the wall. The Prime Minister of Iceland has already thrown in the towel as the leaks showed his wife to have hidden undeclared wealth in an offshore company avoiding taxes in her country. Iceland faced a major economic slump a few years ago and Icelanders were sent reeling into economic recession –and this is what their political leaders were up to. The British Prime Minister is in an embarrassing situation with evidence that his rich father operated an offshore company for 30 years without paying taxes in the UK and the PM was a direct beneficiary as a share-holder. The Russian President is accused of having such overseas accounts through a business oligarch and the Pakistan PM is answering questions about his children’s offshore accounts. The President of Ukraine has been named. In China, the official word is “no comment” to questions about its own leadership, the emirs of several Gulf states are on the list, and the list continues to unfold.

The question in this country is; are any Sri Lankans on the list? Whether that is the case is yet to surface. This week websites erroneously ran a list of Sri Lankans named by the ICIJ. This list was not from the ‘Panama Papers’. Panama is a notorious tax haven very much under the influence of the US. Those in the shipping industry are familiar with the fact that the Panama flag is used on vessels that have no nationality. Sri Lankans are likely to have invested their monies in the tax havens of Europe (Gibraltar, Virgin Islands, Luxembourg), West Asia (Dubai) and Hong Kong, not so much in the Caribbean or Latin American countries.

The latest revelations have shown a dis-connect between the rulers of many countries and the people – even in western democracies, and a growing resentment and frustration against the political and business elites by the ordinary citizen; the gulf between the political set and the ordinary members of society has indeed widened.

The news of politicians and businessmen spiriting out money and parking them in shell companies or offshore banks is not an entirely new phenomena. Sri Lanka’s police have investigated cases that have ended up as far as a ‘B’ Report, but it has not proceeded further. Sri Lankan courts were not long ago briefed of a case involving a businessman who ran a web of companies and was found guilty by the Supreme Court of Gibraltar of holding US$ 200 million (Rs. 3,000 million) in an account illegally. Even though Presidents past and present have been informed of such transactions nothing has been done to bring to book the persons involved, nor to see that the country got the monies back. Why? Because these businessmen are too entrenched with the political leaders of Sri Lanka – and vice versa – from all sides of the political divide – paragons of virtue otherwise, who just cannot buck the ‘system’; political leaders who are the recipients of the largesse of a part of this undeclared wealth, by way of what is euphemistically called ‘party donations’ or ‘political contributions’.

These businessmen are fond of boasting how the country’s political leadership is in their pockets and already the new Government is beginning to face accusations that it is old hooch in new bottles; it is ‘business as usual’.

It has something to do with the country’s political system; in fact, it is the ugly side of democracy and elections and electioneering. Politicians need money for politicking and the country has no in-built mechanisms to control the purchase of politicians. It is a well-known fact that the biggest bribe-takers in this country are the mainstream political parties.

Years ago, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike speaking in the State Council supporting a resolution brought to impeach six councillors for bribe-taking said that only the small man is sent to “ravenous wolves” for bribes while everything is done to protect the influential. More recently, President J.R. Jayewardene sacked a fairly innocent MP from Hewaheta for getting involved with a gold smuggler. A more powerful minister was also sacked for interfering in a tender, only to be brought back as the Speaker. Nowadays, politicians protect themselves from investigations by jumping to the governing party that is looking for a majority in Parliament and corrupt businessmen are insulated from prosecution by insuring themselves by hiring powerful politicians and making ‘party donations’.

Even if the ‘Panama Papers’ disclose the names of Sri Lankan political and business hot-shots, it will only be of titillating news value to the public. The mud will not stick for long and a public anaesthetised to such happenings will not be in for too great a shock.

In the wake of the ‘Panama Papers’, the US President referred to tax evasion (illegal) – and tax avoidance (legal but unethical) as being a major issue for his country’s economy. How much more then in economically developing countries like Sri Lanka.

In the face of all that is going on, when well-known business leaders are holding advisory positions in Government ministries – and only past administrations rogues who do not have entre’e to the current political leadership are being hounded, it is justifiable for people to ask why there are sacred cows still roaming free. That is why Bribery Commissions and FCIDs all put together are fast losing their credibility as effective anti-graft vehicles.

When this newspaper revealed a previous ICIJ investigation into Sri Lankans with Swiss bank accounts in violation of the Banking Act, the Money Laundering Act and all the Central Bank and Inland Revenue laws, Government leaders conferred on what to do – how to at least bring the money back – and decided – to do nothing.

But the ‘Panama Papers’ was a moral victory for investigative journalism the world over. In our increasingly digital world, a pen-drive is enough to obtain gigabytes of hidden information about hidden wealth. And at least that ought to be an element of a deterrent to the world’s political and business leaders creaming the fat off the land of their birth.

This story was originally published by The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka