Philips and Kurukulasuriya … and other items
I > Rajan Philips: “One Belt-One Road from China, but no Bridge to India: Lanka’s Development Dilemmas,” Island, 20 May 2017
Even as he bade farewell to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the end of his Vesak visit, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe was all but ready to take flight to China to attend the economic summit of the 21st Century. This was Beijing’s big splash on the world economic map, and one that India chose not to officially attend. Japan was another boycotter. A number of Indian business and think-tank figures went to Beijing as ‘unofficial delegates’, and they were critical of their government’s decision not to send at least an official delegation. 130 countries marked their presence at the two-day (May 14-15) event in Beijing, including 29 state and government leaders. Even the Trump Administration, despite its spiralling turmoil in Washington, was represented in Beijing.
Filed under accountability, centre-periphery relations, China and Chinese influences, energy resources, foreign policy, governance, historical interpretation, Indian Ocean politics, island economy, landscape wondrous, legal issues, life stories, military strategy, nationalism, politIcal discourse, power politics, Rajapaksa regime, self-reflexivity, Sinhala-Tamil Relations, sri lankan society, the imaginary and the real, transport and communications, truth as casualty of war, world events & processes
Lasanda Kurrukulasuriya, courtesy of Daily Mirror, 5 April 2017 where her chosen title is “Geneva resolution is about prosecutions, not reconciliation”… so the Thuppahi title is an Editorial Imposition.
After the UN Human Rights Council 34th session ended in Geneva, the US said it introduced three resolutions that were adopted with ‘broad cross regional support.’ The list included Resolution 34/1 on Sri Lanka. The statement says that ‘Sri Lanka was one of the 47 co-sponsors’ of Resolution 34/1. This assertion is extremely disingenuous, if it is made on the basis that the resolution was adopted without a vote in the 47-member HRC. How could any member state of the HRC or friend of Sri Lanka be expected to raise its voice against the resolution when Sri Lanka itself had submitted to co-sponsoring it?
Filed under accountability, american imperialism, atrocities, British imperialism, centre-periphery relations, China and Chinese influences, constitutional amendments, disparagement, doctoring evidence, foreign policy, governance, historical interpretation, human rights, landscape wondrous, legal issues, life stories, military strategy, politIcal discourse, power politics, self-reflexivity, Sinhala-Tamil Relations, slanted reportage, sri lankan society, the imaginary and the real, world events & processes
Rajiva Wijesinha, in The Island, 9 November 2016, where the chosen title runs ” Ignoring the sovereignty of the Sri Lankan nation” … Highlights and colouring have been added to aid the reader. Editor, Thuppahi
The contempt in leading elements of the current government for the interests of Sri Lanka as a sovereign nation had long puzzled and worried me. A clue to its possible origins emerged recently when I was looking at Michael Roberts’ collection of ‘Documents of the Ceylon National Congress and Nationalist Politics in Ceylon, 1929-1950’. Roberts has there, on p 2802 of Volume 4, an article by J R Jayewardene that recommends ‘An Indo-Lanka Federation’. He does say that ‘It is not possible here to define the status of Lanka in such a federation’, but he claims that amongst important conditions to be fulfilled are that ‘India and Lanka must be one unit for the purpose of defence’ and ‘In the Federal Legislature, Lanka must be accorded a status equivalent to the status of the Indian Provinces’.
young Jr Jayewardene RG Senanayake
Filed under accountability, British colonialism, centre-periphery relations, China and Chinese influences, democratic measures, economic processes, education policy, governance, historical interpretation, Indian Ocean politics, island economy, legal issues, life stories, modernity & modernization, patriotism, politIcal discourse, power politics, Rajapaksa regime, security, Sinhala-Tamil Relations, sri lankan society, world events & processes
Izeth Hussain in The Island, 7 November 2016, where the title is “The Security of Small States,”... Highlights are my work–Editor, Thuppahi
Some years after the holding of the 1976 Non-Aligned Summit Conference in Colombo, the Marga Institute held an international seminar on the security of small states. I wrote the lead paper for it, which was fitting because at the Foreign Ministry I was in charge of the subject of the Non-Aligned Movement which had not given specific attention to the problem of the security of small states. The seminar was regarded as one of the most interesting ever held by the Marga Institute and as a path-breaking one. Substantial chunks of my paper were reproduced in the Lanka Guardian. Thereafter the idea that the security of small states was a problem that had to be addressed fell out of sight. Around 1990 I attended as a Marga representative a UN Conference on the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace at Sochi in the Soviet Union. My address focused on the problem of small state security, which particularly interested Howard Wriggins, scholar and former Ambassador to Sri Lanka, and an American observer who was there. It was thereafter published in the Lanka Guardian. That American observer told me that my address was exceptionally interesting and he was surprised that it made nothing like the impact that it should have made. Clearly I was dealing with an idea whose time had not come.
16th Summit meeting of the NAM
Palitha Kohona, courtesy of the International Press Syndicate, October 2016, where the title is “Sri Lanka and the US – The Past, the Present and the Future.” Kohona’s sub-titles are in red. Emphasisin blue highlighting has beena dded by the Editor, Thuppahi.
Sri Lanka’s relations with the US go back a long way and have encompassed many different areas of interest. These have mostly enriched the relationship. In recent times, the bilateral relationship has undergone considerable stress. As to whether Sri Lanka occupied the central attention of US foreign policy makers to any significant degree in the past, or even at present, can be the subject of a useful discussion, perhaps after a few glasses of good Californian wine. But for Sri Lanka, the US has been a vital foreign policy concern, especially in the recent past. A brief survey of the relationship in the past reveals that the US established a consulate in Galle as far back as 1857, at a time when many of the countries with embassies in Colombo today, did not even exist as countries. Then, the main interest of the US was the need to provide consular services to the US whaling fleet operating in the Indian Ocean. Continue reading
Filed under accountability, american imperialism, China and Chinese influences, cultural transmission, economic processes, foreign policy, governance, historical interpretation, Indian Ocean politics, island economy, landscape wondrous, legal issues, life stories, LTTE, military strategy, modernity & modernization, politIcal discourse, power politics, Rajapaksa regime, Responsibility to Protect or R2P, security, Sinhala-Tamil Relations, truth as casualty of war, world events & processes