Indo-Sri Lanka ties go back thousands of years with a strong relationship forged through cultural, economic and political links. A lot has been said about how India has come to our aid since the early stages of civilisation in Sri Lanka. Today, a thankful Sri Lanka looks to the future as our government talks about how India and Sri Lanka can collaborate and forge a better future. President Wickremesinghe’s visit and statements in New Delhi, amount to a national policy stance, which when expressed overseas has a significant impact on how Sri Lanka is viewed.

Strengthening this relationship was one of the primary objectives of President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent visit to New Delhi, where he held talks with his counterpart Droupadi Murmu and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Indian External Affairs Minister and the National Security Advisor. Content of what both parties reached or were discussed indicate that they have paid significant attention to projects, which are to benefit both nations mutually and enhance cross Palk Strait connectivity. As per the media reports, during the President’s visit, attention had been paid to matters including setting up a university in Nuwara Eliya, establishing Indian universities in Sri Lanka, plans banning bottom trawling fishing practices in the northern sea areas taken up during the discussions, and working cooperatively in the Indian ocean region so as not to threaten mutual security. There has also been discussion about building an oil pipeline and land bridge between the regional giant and the island nation. Further, unprecedented proposals such as using the Indian Rupee in Sri Lanka as a valid currency had also received attention.

While both Wickremesinghe and Indian Premier Modi seem quite happy with the policy statements and the fusions between both states, the policy statements made by the Sri Lankan President in New Delhi lack one vital ingredient. Many of his undertakings lack robust discussion and consensus in Sri Lanka prior to being stated in India. A shortcoming Sri Lanka has made before, with consequences. Sri Lanka, by example of the about-to-turn on the LRT rail project and the Colombo East Terminal project, have shown that the island is prone to be weak on standing on their stated policies. A weakness derived out of petty politics, and lack of meaningful political consensus before embarking on serious business. As such Wickremesinghe’s policy roll out in New Delhi, should have been done first in Colombo with robust debates. Only then, would Sri Lanka be able to stand on policies which there is bipartisan support, and has won the public’s trust.  

Many of these matters discussed in New Delhi, partially or fully come under the purview of President Wickremesinghe, as he is also the Minister of Finance, Economic Stabilisation and National Policies. Not only does he have a responsibility concerning the policy aspect of those matters, as the Executive, he also has responsibility regarding the message that he conveys to the international community – who, in this case, is India. The lack of domestic discourse on what was said in New Delhi, in Parliament, indicates a failure in judgement.  Such matters, such as land connectivity, linking national energy grids and petroleum supply and development of strategic sites like Trincomalee, which has already been linked to India through the 13th Amendment, should have seen robust debate in Colombo before the consensus was announced overseas.

This is not an irrational concern. Sri Lanka is a country that has been grappling with national level crises for decades because of wrong policies, policies which did not have consensus. The most infamous one among them is the Official Language Act No. 33 of 1956, which gained attention as the ‘Sinhala Only Act’. The rift created between Sinhala speakers and Tamil speakers continues to this day, as they played a considerable role in conflicts between the two groups. The post war hard ‘tilt’ towards China at the expense of a more even keel approach to foreign policy was a similar mistake, which again did not see robust debate. Let’s not forget the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which had almost no debate and was rushed in, that has failed to be fully implemented, created an unending debate between Sinhala leaders-led governments and North and East-based Tamil politicians. The 13th Amendment was passed without adequately discussing the different opinions about it, especially in a context where there was a need to please India. These old issues remain unresolved even today, and the ethnic tensions it was supposed to address, remain unaddressed, nearly three decades later.

There are many examples where Sri Lanka made wrong policy moves. One might argue that mere discussions with no concrete agreement with India. It is important to keep India happy and close, they are our neighbours and have helped us during some of the hardest periods in history. Nevertheless, as a country that has suffered long enough to know the consequences of short-sighted policies, and also as a country that is desperately in need of international support, we should be careful not to give promises we are not ready to fulfil. It is important to understand that Sri Lanka as a country being ready to implement policies that have an international aspect to them, is not the same as the President or the government being ready and indicating willingness to do so. While consensus within the government and the parliament is necessary, it is also a matter of consensus with the people. 

Sri Lankans have to be convinced on the policies they are going to stand for, and that means sound communication, transparency and debate. We must learn from our past mistakes, and we must move forward with consensus. Without consensus, and belief in change, there is likely to be none.