By Izeth Hussain
Izethhussain@gmail.com
In
my article Successes at Geneva (Island of March 7) I postulated a
special relationship, a nexus, between India and the US in regard to
Sri Lanka, more specifically in regard to our ethnic problem. I won’t
recapitulate the whole of my argument as the article was published very
recently. Instead I will pose a simple straightforward question: why
should the US bother about our ethnic problem to the extent of playing
the leading role in Geneva against us? It is not of vital or serious
importance to the US, and it does not impact on international relations
in a harmful way. So why attract opprobrium against itself as it has
done in Geneva?
In my article I advanced two explanations.
One was that in helping solve our ethnic problem the US would be making
a contribution – albeit a small one – towards the establishment of a
New World Order, an enterprise in which the US and India are seen as
partners, and it would also be helping India in a matter of primordial
interest to it, for the reason that as long as the ethnic problem is
unsolved it could even come to pose a threat to India’s unity. In
recent years another factor has entered the scene: the unavoidable
emergence of China as the next pre-eminent super-power, a factor that
dictates an Indo-US nexus whether they want it or not. So, the US has
good reason to go out of the way to be helpful towards India, even to
the extent of attracting some measure of opprobrium against itself.
In
this article I want to suggest that the nexus goes as far back as the
1980s, and even that it was the major factor behind the Indo-Sri Lankan
Peace Accords of 1987. I doubt that those Accords would have come about
at that time if not for the role played by the US. I believe that the
motivating factor behind the US role was remorse, that is to say
remorse over having misled the Jayewardene Government into believing
that in exchange for a special position for the US in Trincomalee the
US would ensure Sri Lanka’s security against any threat from India. It
is known, of course, that it was the apparent building up of a special
US-Sri Lanka relationship that led to the wreckage of Indo-Sri Lanka
relations. In the background of course was the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan in 1979, which was given explicit approval by India. It
seemed reasonable to suppose at that time that the US would go to any
extent in making counter-moves in South Asia, including the securing of
a special US position in Trincomalee, in the form even of a naval
base.
I have no hard evidence by way of documentation or
anything else to support my argument. My evidence is of an anecdotal
order based on what I observed at first hand as second-in-command in
the Foreign Office from the beginning of 1986 till towards the end of
1988. In that position I had plenty of interaction with Jim Spain the
US Ambassador and other officials in his Embassy, interaction in the
course of which I noticed there was an emphatic reiteration of one
point: "We don’t want Trinco". I did not understand the point of that
emphatic reiteration for some time because my supposition had always
been that the US would not want – not really and seriously – a special
position in Trinco because that would incur the eternal and unrelenting
enmity of India. But the US could have pretended to want it for some
years. However, there was no need for that pretence after it became
obvious that Afghanistan was becoming the Soviet Union’s Vietnam. My
supposition is that even so the JRJ Government went on assuming,
ignorantly and stupidly, that getting US support against India in
exchange for a special position in Trinco was still a viable option. It
seemed to me retrospectively that the US could have experienced some
degree of remorse over its having contributed to the wrecking of
Indo-Sri Lanka relations, and hence a desire to help sort out our
ethnic problem.
Some time before the Peace Accords were
signed I found that some of the Ambassadors in Colombo were dropping
hints about some sort of Indo-Sri Lanka agreement being in the offing. I
found that such hints were being dropped also to Foreign Secretary
W.T. Jayasinghe. When it became known that an agreement would be signed
shortly, I told WTJ that so abrupt a volte-face from thoroughly
unsatisfactory Indo-Sri Lankan relations to the entente implied by
Peace Accords was very extraordinary and required explanation. My
surmise was that a third force, a strong and determining third force,
had come into play. WTJ attended the signing ceremony of the Peace
Accords, and told me next morning that my surmise was correct. The
first thing that happened after the signing ceremony was over was that
the US Ambassador walked up to President JR and handed him an envelope.
Almost certainly it contained a message of congratulations and
goodwill from the US President. I believe that the rather ostentatious
handing over of the envelope at that moment signified two things. One
was that the US Government was already aware of the contents of the
Peace Accords, and the other was that the Ambassadors present on the
occasion were meant to infer that the Peace Accords had the full
backing of the US Government. I must mention that the Foreign Report of
the Economist (London) stated not long afterwards that the Peace
Accords were not drafted in Colombo.
I must also mention
something significant that happened on the morning of the air-drop. The
US Ambassador sought a very urgent meeting with our Foreign Minister
in order to convey a message of the highest importance from his
Government. The message consisted of two parts. One was that in turning
back the Indian flotilla bearing food the Government had missed an
excellent opportunity of defusing a dangerous situation. The other was
that the Indian Government was about to do something that could be very
upsetting and the US strongly advised that we should not over-react in
any way. It could be that the US Government was acting on information
provided by the CIA. I believe that it is far more likely that it was
acting at the request of the Indian Government.
The Indo-US
nexus extends, therefore, over several decades. It probably dates from
the mid-eighties, following on Rajiv Gandhi’s state visit to the US,
and provides the rationale for the US going out of the way to present a
Resolution at Geneva that can be construed as inimical to Sri Lanka, a
Resolution which furthermore attracts to the US some measure of
international opprobrium. Why does the US pick on Sri Lanka when its
own record on war crimes is stupendously horrendous, and so are the
human rights records of its Middle Eastern and other buddies? The
obvious motivation is that it is going out of the way to help India in
the efforts to solve Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem.

No comments:
Post a Comment