By Asiri Fernando The defence establishment of Sri Lanka needs an urgent review and reforms as the high expenditure on defence is no longer sustainable, experts told The Sunday Morning. State expenditure on security and defence remains high in Sri Lanka even though the armed conflict ended 12 years ago. Sri Lanka’s internal and external security environments have changed considerably in the last decade. However, the island’s defence expenditure has not evolved accordingly. According to State expenditure watchdog PublicFinance.lk, a platform run by the Colombo-based think tank Verité Research, Sri Lanka’s defence expenditure has remained in the region of 2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) since 2017. In 2021, the then Government proposed a defence budget of Rs. 373 billion ($ 1.86 billion in 2021 rates) for 2022, a 14% increase over the allocation in 2021. In 2021, Sri Lanka allocated Rs. 268 billion for health amidst the Covid-19 pandemic while allocating Rs. 373 billion for defence – a move that was widely criticised by Opposition policymakers and economists at the time.  The prioritisation of State funds for defence over the needs of the health sector during the Covid pandemic is a clear indication that budget prioritisation is flawed. Politicisation of ‘national security’ Traditionally, there has been little political will in Sri Lanka to scrutinise defence expenditure, which is part of the problem. Minority political parties have often questioned increases in defence expenditure. There is also little transparency or public discussion on the topic, until recent years where the worsening economy made some question why Sri Lanka continues to spend heavily on defence. The politicisation of ‘national security’ and its misuse over the years by ruling policymakers may have also generalised a defence-heavy understanding of national security – a topic for another time. However, following Sri Lanka’s declaration of bankruptcy and ongoing negotiations for debt restructuring and an assistance programme with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Sri Lanka will need to significantly reduce its spending on defence as part of reducing State expenditure. According to a former Advisor to the Ministry of Finance and Economist Daniel Alphonsus, the Government should appoint a commission of inquiry on defence expenditure and national security architecture. “I would recommend that the Government establish a commission of inquiry consisting of an economist, a former civil servant, and a security expert to examine the defence budget and make recommendations,” Alphonsus told The Sunday Morning. Reviewing defence architecture Responding to a question on the need for a review of national security architecture, reduction in expenditure, and streamlining of the defence posture, former Chief of Staff of the Sri Lanka Army, Major General (Retd) Jagath Dias said: “We need to look at bringing the current defence expenditure to a sustainable level given the backdrop of the ongoing economic crisis that is seemingly going to last for another couple of years. However, that should not be done hastily and certainly not at the expense of national security.  “Certain non-essential expenditures may be reduced without delay. National security architecture includes management, decision-making, oversight structures and institutions, as well as national policies, strategies, and plans. Many institutions and agencies contribute to national security management, so co-ordination of decision-making is important at the highest levels.” At present, thousands of armed forces personnel are deployed to carry out tasks that they are not traditionally trained or equipped for, including several thousands who are attached to the Road Development Authority (RDA), various development programmes, and fertiliser production. Such use of military manpower and assets are a waste of State funds and poor utilisation of well-trained troops. Dias highlighted that revisiting the defence architecture should be done periodically with the size of the armed forces being ‘right-sized’ according to the threat environment. According to him, a comprehensive National Security Policy should be formulated without delay, involving all stakeholders. ‘Ideological conflict remains’ When asked why Sri Lanka did not reduce defence expenditure following the end of the armed conflict in 2009, the former Army Chief of Staff opined: “The armed conflict ended 12 years ago, but the ideological (secessionist) conflict remains to date. There is enough evidence to support this perception both in this country and globally. Unfortunately, there are certain local political entities which work in line with this notion as well. There is also a de facto political organisation called the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) formed outside Sri Lanka. The latter is intimately linked to the ‘radicalised’ segments of the Sri Lankan diaspora.  “The other factor is that there are a considerable number of LTTE remnant cadres living in Sri Lanka and overseas and they are at large. In my opinion, all of the above are working towards achieving their final objective of a separate Tamil homeland in Sri Lanka.”  He added that unless a reasonable political arrangement acceptable to all people of Sri Lanka was arrived at, major changes to the internal security outlook were ill-advised. Defence expenditure sub-optimal However, Alphonsus, who has authored a report on Sri Lankan defence expenditure – ‘Sri Lanka’s Post-War Defence Budget: Overspending and Underprotection’ – argues that due to lack of scrutiny, Sri Lanka’s defence expenditure may be less than optimal. “Defence is the single largest item of Government expenditure of the country, accounting for 11% of Government spending in 2017. It is also the budget category that probably receives the least scrutiny. As a result, there is good reason to think that Sri Lanka’s spending may be sub-optimal,” he said. When asked if Sri Lanka had failed to prioritise its defence expenditure and modernise over the years in terms of capability and effectiveness, Alphonsus opined: “Reviews by Jane’s International Defence Review and the Lowy Institute suggest that despite this huge outlay, Sri Lanka’s defence capabilities are relatively poor. This is because our force structure reflects the threats of the past, not the present or future. Our force structure is geared to fight a semi-conventional internal war. This makes little sense in the post-war reality where intelligence, diplomacy, and cyberspace play a much more pivotal role.” He also pointed out that during certain years, Sri Lanka had a higher defence expenditure than during times of war. Reserves and right-sizing The Sri Lanka military, despite the high defence expenditure, remains poorly equipped and technologically behind a number of comparable countries. Most of the arms, combat vehicles, aircrafts, and vessels of the armed forces are decades old. Many are kept in storage due to lack of spares, overhaul, and modernisation. Sri Lanka should consider adjusting the structure of the armed forces to reduce expenditure while maintaining a robust force, Alphonsus recommended. “The number one priority is the introduction of reserves. Reserves can significantly reduce the size of the defence budget while maintaining defence capability. Nearly 80% of Sri Lanka’s defence expenditure is on personnel, which accounts for over 40% of the Government wage bill. Unlike almost every other country in the world, and its own history, Sri Lanka basically doesn’t have reserves. The world average is for roughly 40% of troops to be active duty and 60% to be in the reserves. Introducing reserves will also free up manpower for productive economic activity and help with the recovery process,” Alphonsus explained. A senior military official who spoke to The Sunday Morning on terms of anonymity said that the armed forces’ strength in terms of personnel was below the State-approved number of cadres.  “However, we have many troops, sailors, and airmen who are deployed for non-military tasks; we have recruited tradesmen for development projects. This is a waste. We can right-size the cadre and reduce the number of personnel while maintaining a robust capability, if there is a well-thought-out review and reorganisation,” the military official said. First responders The armed forces have become the first responders to an ever-increasing frequency of natural disasters and climate-related emergencies. However, there is no dedicated budget for such operations to ensure funds for relevant equipment for them to carry out such duties safely and effectively. The manmade maritime disasters of the recent past – the MT New Diamond crude oil tanker and the MV X-Press Pearl over the last three years, for example – have also highlighted significant shortcomings in Sri Lanka’s ability to respond to maritime emergencies and pollution, even though the country is dependent on maritime trade and has a large volume of commercial sea traffic in the close vicinity of the island. The Easter Sunday bombings of 2019 showcased shortcomings and negligence of the State intelligence apparatus, a weak approach to mitigate extremist ideologies and flawed command leadership of the higher echelons of the security establishment and the Government. Addressing Parliament last week, President Ranil Wickremesinghe predicted a difficult period ahead for Sri Lanka, adding that hard choices would need to be made to ensure Sri Lanka regained stability. Given the state of the economy and the need to strengthen fiscal discipline, revisiting Sri Lanka’s security and defence architecture will no longer be avoidable. Peacekeeping: Opportunities and challenges One area the defence establishment can generate revenue and foreign currency inflows in particular is through increased deployment of Sri Lankan armed forces for peacekeeping duties with the United Nations. In the South Asian region, Nepal and Bangladesh contribute a significant number of their armed forces for peacekeeping, thereby gaining international goodwill, recognition, and dollars in the process. It also aids in retaining critical military skill competencies within the armed forces at no extra cost, while the exposure to hostile environments and other peacekeepers gives the troops much-needed experience and professional interactions. Information which The Sunday Morning obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) request indicates that the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) had earned $ 76.86 million over a 12-year period from peacekeeping missions. According to the SLAF, on average its peacekeepers in South Sudan and the Central African Republic (CAR) earn $ 5.16 million and $ 5.10 million respectively per annum.  As of June 2022, there were 113 Air Force personnel including a woman officer deployed on peacekeeping missions. Over the last few years, the SLAF has sent seven contingents to South Sudan and five to the CAR.  An SLAF peacekeeper is paid $ 1,480 per month and each hour an SLAF helicopter flies under UN colours sees the Air Force reimbursed $ 4,300. The SLAF currently has three MI-17 helicopters assigned to the peacekeeping mission in CAR. The UN pays the SLAF for maintenance, fuel, and for each flying hour the helicopters are deployed. According to the Sri Lanka Army (SLA), 434 SLA troops including women officers were deployed on three peacekeeping missions as of June 2022. In 2021, Army peacekeepers earned the Treasury $ 13.2 million. With many European nations pulling out of peacekeeping duties, there is a significant demand for well-trained peacekeepers, particularly in conflict-ridden Africa. Over the years, Sri Lankan peacekeepers in Mali have been commended for their professionalism and bravery in protecting vital aid convoys. Recently, the SLAF contingent in CAR was commended for its bravery and skill when it supported a counterattack on rebels that had attacked a village. Two Sri Lankan peacekeepers were killed in Mali and several injured when a Radio-Controlled Improvised Explosive Device (RCIED) was detonated under their armoured personnel carrier. According to the Army, the UN pays compensation for peacekeepers killed in the line of duty. However, there remain significant obstacles for Sri Lanka to expand its contribution to peacekeeping. Longstanding war crimes and rights-abuse allegations, allegations of indiscipline and lack of accountability (particularly during a mission to Haiti), lack of a coherent State policy on peacekeeping, outdated equipment, and poor logistical capacity plague Sri Lanka’s efforts to expand peacekeeping operations.