Saturday Sep 21, 2024
Saturday Sep 21, 2024
Wednesday, 28 January 2015 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera
By Dharisha Bastians
Q: There’s a famous story that when you first walked into this Ministry after Minister Kadirgamar’s assassination, you are reported to have said those were big shoes to fill. What’s it like this time around?
A:When I took over as Foreign Minister in 2005, I found the task daunting because I had to follow in the footsteps of one of the greatest and finest foreign ministers Sri Lanka has ever had. But today again returning to the same room and the same desk seven years later, I find the task daunting for exactly the opposite reason. Foreign policy has totally been dashed to the ground. To revive the foreign policy in order to ensure that Sri Lanka is a respected country in the community of civilised nations will take some time.
Q: You’ve served in different ministries, but you seem to keep turning up back here. Do you feel like you have found your nicheas it were with Foreign Affairs?
A:No, I certainly did enjoy being Foreign Minister in 2005, because even then we did manage to achieve certain things, like the listing of the LTTE as a terrorist organisation in the European Union. This was a strenuous task, but when it finally came through I felt a certain sense of satisfaction, not because I had lis
ted the LTTE as a proscribed organisation, but because I believed it would pressure the LTTE to come to the negotiating table.
I have always believed in a negotiated settlement and the LTTE was one party which always stood in the way of such a negotiation. So there were achievements earlier and I think again, it is an honour to again come back and start almost from scratch and try to build up foreign relations and the Foreign Ministry in the months ahead.
Having said that, as a politician who has to rely on his electorate to get re-elected, the Foreign Ministry is perhaps the worst ministry for a politician who seeks re-election. You hardly get time to go to your electorate and even though you can do a lot for your country, there is very little you can do for your electorate and your people. So that is the downside. But finally I decided that country comes first.
Also, I have been in Parliament for 26 years now and one more general election will be more than enough, because I want some active years to roam the world as I did when I was young. There nooks and corners of the world I would love to visit. I want to do it as a private citizen. But I see this as a decisive period and I think perhaps I could make a difference in a small way.
Q: This Ministry itself has been in the public glare for all the wrong reasons in recent years. You have only a 100-day period, but what kind of serious reform can you hope to undertake to rebuild its image?
A:I think the biggest problem here like all other ministries has been the scale of the politicisation which it had undergone in the last eight or nine years. Frankly, I don’t blame the last two foreign ministers who sat on this chair since I left. They were totally dictated to by the Presidential Secretariat, the President and the President’s brothers, etc. Even if Lakshman Kadirgamar had been given life and brought back to the chair, he may not have been able to help it either.
They more or less used the Foreign Ministry like a private foreign employment bureau. It provided employment opportunities, business opportunities and other international opportunities for their unemployable friends and relatives. The whole structure I would say, has been pulled down because of it.
Q: But can you revive it?
A:I think so. Even though it has been politicised and the service has been politicised and it has crumbled, the people who have come through the Foreign Service are still there. And there is a lower level of very good talented younger diplomats. And I think it is a matter of re-balancing the forces. That is why as a first step I have said that we will revert to the 70-30% formula in appointing heads of mission, where 70% will be from the Foreign Service and if at all, 30% will be political appointees. But even those, we will ensure they are people of the highest calibre in their respective fields. Within this new framework, I don’t hope to have more than 19 political appointments, out of 66 heads of mission. It could be less, but certainly not more. The lesser the better.
Q: So political heads of mission have been recalled. What about the political appointments to other ranks in Sri Lankan missions – thereare reportedly several dozen?
A: The second and third levels I have not touched so far. Because the situation is even more grave in that area. Again, this employment bureau has been for everyone’s children who are not able to find employment elsewhere, they have been pushed into the Foreign Service. There is even a sectio
n in the Ministry that was opened for CHOGM. There has been a group of people and they were named ‘CHOGM babies,’ consisting again the brood of politicians. So this is another area that we have to clean up. But we can’t recall all of them at once, because if we do, most of our missions will collapse. So we have to do it stage by stage.
Q: Do you have a number on the political appointees existing at those lower levels?
A: No, but it’s a lot. Not only that, I was shocked the other day to see the list of diplomatic passport holders – 1,841 diplomatic passport holders in this little country. And many of them in the employment category, it saysunemployed, student, hairdresser, housewife. All these catchers, friends and cronies of the Rajapaksa administration have been doled out diplomatic passports. This has made it an utterly worthless document. And it also brings our standing down in the rest of the world. When people go around flashing diplomatic passports for their own purposes, the respect we have had in other parts of the world I am not surprised has come down so drastically. Those of course have been issuednot directly under my Ministry, but under the Immigration Department.
Q: Are you aware that current Cabinet Minister for Women’s Affairs Chandrani Bandara’s son also serves as a political appointee at the mission in Dubai?
A: Yes, he is one out of many. I think it is very unfair to single out only Chandrani Bandara’s son, when there are so many. But yes, he is one out of many.
Q: Will he be recalled too?
A: Oh yes. I really would not want to start making any exceptions at all. If one is to succeed in one’s policy, it is a deathblow if you start making exceptions. Then everyone else will also start making exceptions. I will not and I haven’t. In fact, when I recalled some of the heads of mission, I have had very close friends of mine coming to me and canvassing on behalf of certain heads of mission. Even though I may know them and I respect those who have made those requests, I don’t want to deviate from those decisions at all.
The only person we gave a month’s extension is the High Commissioner to India, because of the pending visit of the President to India next month. All the others, no.
Q: Is this kind of policy going to make you unpopular in the Government?
A: (Laughs) I have never been particularly popular with the Government.
Q: This Government has already taken several steps to remove the military footprint from civilian life, in education and other areas. What happens to the military officers serving in Lankan missions abroad?
A:We have to discuss with the Defence Ministry and take a decision on that.
Q:Are you aware of the fact that the Brigadier in charge during the Weliweriya attack on the water demonstration serves as a diplomat overseas? Will he be summoned and held accountable?
A:I think all of them will be summoned to answer. I think in all areas, whether it is murder or human rights violations, againthere should not be exceptions. If there are such allegations they should be inquired into and suitable action be taken. I am not saying that we should initiate a broad witc
h-hunt against all those involved with the Rajapaksa administration. We know so many people who had no choice but to cooperate. But as the Magnitsky law that was brought in the US, even the engine drivers who took the Jewish people to Auschwitz to the gas chambers, should be equally guilty as Hitler for ordering it. So the guilty, whoever they might be, must be punished.
Q: During your recent visit to India, it looked like you and Indian Government officials got on famously well. What do you perceive as being their actual reaction to Maithripala Sirisena’s victory?
A:I think there is a great sense of euphoria in India about the new President and the political culture it represents. It is not really based on a person, but they expect a huge change in Sri Lanka and its political culture. And I would say not only in India, but most of the world is very excited about it. Even though we have only been in power for two-and-a-half weeks, it has raised the hopes of whole world about Sri Lanka to new heights. I think it is up to us now to live up to those expectations.
Q: Your first visits as Foreign Minister are in this order, to Delhi, Brussels and Washington. Is this indicative of a proper pivot towards the more democratic world in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy?
A:No, I would say it is a very clear indication that we are moving back to the centre. We are not moving back towards any power bloc. But I think in terms of our foreign policy we had veered away from the centre. Now we are back to the centre and back in business. If we are to have a foreign policy which will benefit Sri Lankans, it is important that we engage with the West as well, instead of the very confrontational and vitriolic kind of relationship we had with them over the past few years. So basically we certainly are going to improve our relationships with the West and India and the rest of the world. But certainly not at the expense of the other countries either, for example China. I have already met the Ambassador here and I am hoping also to visit China as early as possible. China has remained a great friend for centuries and throughout the last so many years.
Q: But all this talk that some Chinese projects in Sri Lanka will be re-evaluated. Will this not affect relations with that country which has become Sri Lanka’s number one investor?
A:No, it shouldn’t. What I explained to the Ambassador and what I will explain to the leaders in Beijing as well is that what we have a problem with is not Chinese investment. But like the Chinese Government today, the Sri Lankan Government is also totally against corruption. We are declaring a war against corruption as the Chinese have done with their own systems. In that respect, I hope the Chinese Government will help to inquire into corruption that has tainted some of the big projects that have come to Sri Lanka. So what we object to is the allegations of corruption and not the fact that they are backed by Chinese money.
I hope China will understand and that China will help the Government. If the Government has reasons to believe that some of their companies have been involved in corruption in Sri Lanka, I hope the Chinese will take the initiative to punish those who have been engaged in corruption with the respective parties here.
Q: International reports have even suggested that the Indian spy agency, RAW played a crucial role in the recently concluded Presidential election. If so, with this new regime is it safe to say Sri Lanka has once again been absorbed well within India’s strategic sphere of influence?
A:This is what I told the Indian press also. Please don’t insult the intelligence of the Sri Lankan electorate. Sri Lankans have the oldest functioning democracy, we introduced universal franchise before any other country in Asia. And our people are experts in electing governments and throwing governments out. They don’t need the support nor the advice of any intelligence agency. That was a news plant by the Rajapaksas to justify their defeat.
If you recall, even during the election their whole campaign was based on the international conspiracy theory. While they were in power and holding all the media institutions under their iron grip, they would have gone to town with such an expulsion. After this allegation, I happened to ask the Indians if any of their diplomats had left early. They said no, all of their diplomats who left had concluded their term. Unlike in Sri Lanka, they have very specific three year terms in office.
Of course in Sri Lanka, President Rajapaksa’s cousin in Moscow has now completed 8.5 years. Kohona in New York has been there for donkey’s years, which is unheard of. But here, diplomats come and go. So I think this was just a red herring planted by the Rajapaksas from Medamulana.
Q: You said of your Indian visit that you brought up devolution and the 13th Amendment. Given the compulsions within the current ruling alliance, do you think this Government can deliver on the 13A and promises to the Tamils?
A:We didn’t give India any assurances of any kind, nor did they ask for one. I must make that perfectly clear. In fact they made it perfectly clear that whatever changes we are envisaging must be done at our own pace in keeping with our own priorities. But I said that we as a Government were determined to ensure that the national problemor the political settlement to the grievances of the Tamil people must be settled once and for all. But for the moment we are more interested especially in the first 100 days, in getting some of the ground situation right. That is why as promised we are now appointing civilian governors to the north and the East both. They are both highly-respected civil servants, Palihakkara and Austin Fernando. And the lands taken away from those people in those areas will be returned as early as possible. In fact we are waiting for those lists and then the process will commence.
However, after the general election and after we form a government of national unity for the next five years, one of the main priorities will be to ensure that there is a political settlement. I have always said, and I believe that the majority of the Government feels so, that a political settlement is a sine qua non for economic development in this country. I don’t believe in any more select committees, etc., because we have studied this problem inside out. From Thimpu to the last APRC report, we have many, many excellent reports. It’s not a matter of reinventing the wheel but having the political will to do the right thing. My feeling is that the JHU are not as extreme as you think. I think we could persuade them to a settlement which does not divide the country.
Q: Is that one of the major success of this alliance, that it has brought its players to the centre?
A:The major success story of this alliance and the election is that the centre has struck back. We were veering away to a very extremist, ultra-nationalist society, almost bordering on Hitler’s National Socialism of the 1930s. Then, all of a sudden, there is this change. With the Arab Spring, they used bullets and stones and guns. But here in Sri Lanka, in typical Sri Lankan style, laidback and non-violent, we had our own rainbow revolution, not with the bullet but with the ballot.
The centre has reasserted itself. That is the greatest achievement and that is also the greatest challenge. We have to jealously guard what we have achieved. That is why I feel that the international community has a huge obligation to ensure that they support us to build this country. To ensure that what we have achieved is sustained and built upon.
Q: Why is Jayantha Dhanapala going to Geneva?
A:It’s really not a secret or anything. We are sounding out with the key players about different options available to us with regard to the international investigation which has commenced.
We have studied the options available. We have had different discussions with the parties involved. We felt Jayantha Dhanapala should go to Geneva immediately and meet the High Commissioner there to sound him out on the options available. Basically this is what I would call a ‘feeler’ trip. It is not to commit on anything. But we are going to talk to the UN, member states that sponsored this resolution.
It is a matter of looking at different options and getting their opinions before we decide on a definitive roadmap, which as the Prime Minister has said will be presented to Cabinet and we will embark on it.
Q: Is Government seriously contemplating UN technical assistance for a domestic investigation?
A:Yes. It’s one of the options available.
Q: These efforts will help to defer the report in March this year?
A:It could be deferred or it could even be concluded. One of the options would be for them to conclude the report and then refer it to the domestic mechanism in Sri Lanka to take whatever actions necessary, to be decided by the mechanism here instead of dragging this on.
Q: So you’re saying this whole UN issue could all be over in March?
A:We don’t want this investigation to be hanging over us like a sword of sorts, because we are committed to ensuring that justice prevails for those who have suffered. Within that context, the sooner this investigation is over and concluded and referred to Sri Lanka, the better.
Q: How much of what happened at UNHRC and the challenges the Government has facedhas to do with the way the Rajapaksa regime handled things rather than our HR record?
A:They totally botched up the whole situation. Something that could have been handled in a reasonable manner, in consultation with our friends abroad, was totally messed up by the Government. It brought this investigation upon itself because of the various conflicting signals it gave the international community and because of the various promises it gave the international community without the slightest intention of meeting them. It created a huge trust deficit between Sri Lanka and the international community. So we have to gradually step by step put things right and build back the trust and credibility with them.
Q: Presumably, your predecessor, Prof. Peiris, who is a highly-learned man, could have counselled the regime though on such matters?
A:A man of that calibre should have done so, but unfortunately, he became a ‘yes man’ to the regime and babysitter to Namal Rajapaksa. He spent more time currying favour with the Rajapaksas in Medamulana than pursuing foreign policy. His idea of advancing foreign relations was opening more and more embassies in Africa. He didn’t have the courage of his convictions to do what was right. He was being told what to do by the President’s de facto Foreign Minister here, who was Sajin Vaas Gunewardane.
Q: Is it going to be different for you? Will the President and the Prime Minister heed counsel and act in consultation with you and others on matters of foreign policy?
A:Definitely. I take all my decisions in consultation with both the President and the Prime Minister. In fact, even our response to the UNHRC, once we have looked at all the options, the final decision will be made by the President, the Prime Minister and myself in consultation with the Cabinet, whereas before it was just a small group of people dictating terms from Temple Trees according to the whims and fancies of the former President and his family.
Q: You played a pivotal role in bringing President Mahinda Rajapaksa to power in 2005 – anact for which you apologised later. On the morning of 9 January, when you knew he had been defeated, what did you feel?
A:Relieved. And I would say, the whole country, even those who were too frightened to say so, there was a collective sigh of relief. It was the same feeling as when the LTTE was defeated. Even among the Tamil people who allowed themselves to be subjugated over the years and wouldn’t say a word. The moment the LTTE was defeated, other than the horrendous violations and the tragedies of losing their kith and kin, I would say in general there was a collective sigh of relief. I had the same feeling that I had when the LTTE was defeated, when Mahinda was defeated on 9 January. Thank God it’s over.
