Connect with us

Opinion

Contrasting Strategy – Aggression vs support

Published

on

China has invested more than USD 60 Billion in Venezuela and plans to invest further in that country. This is happening despite the abduction by the US of Venezuela’s president Maduro and his wife and US President Donald Trump’s boastful claim that he will be selling Venezuela’s oil. And what is even more surprising is that the Venezuelan Ambassador to China says nobody but Venezuela will decide the price of its oil and to whom it sells. He has assured that Chinese investments in his country will be safe and secure.

According to media reports, Venezuelan Ambassador to China, Remigio Ceballos, has stated that Venezuela will determine the price of its oil exports to China independently, asserting that prices will follow international market trends rather than dictates by the United States. Ceballos has stated that Caracas “will not heed the arrangements of the US or other countries” on oil pricing. The remarks followed reports that the U.S. is planning to exercise control over Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA, and potentially push prices down to $50 per barrel. Ceballos sought to reassure China that its investments in the South American country remained secure, emphasising that China and Venezuela are “trusted partners”. The ambassador clarified that despite geopolitical tensions, Venezuela would not follow Washington-led pricing structures, ensuring its oil remains competitive. These statements came in response to intense geopolitical maneuvering in early 2026 regarding Venezuela’s oil sector and its ongoing energy relationship with China (CNBC, 4th Feb. 2026).

Failure of agression

These developments reveal the failure of aggression in the face of support and cooperation. The US imposed crippling sanctions on Venezuela while China helped it to survive. Finally, true to form, the US did what it does best, take out the leader, like it did in Iraq, Libya and several other countries. Nowhere has this strategy succeeded, whereas the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative has been welcomed in most countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. China provides leadership in several key international associations and organisations designed to foster, or in some cases offer alternatives to, the existing global order. Key groupings include the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), alongside specialised UN agencies and regional forums like the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC).  In contrast most of the US led organizations such as NATO, QUAD, AUKUS, are military alliances. Further, the US has defence agreements with several countries which are strategically vital for its interests, in the Middle East, Africa, Americas and Asia. China does not have a formal alliance requiring it to fight for another country. China adopts an anti-alliance policy and officially opposes NATO-like military alliances, arguing they create “small cliques” that cause confrontations in the region. China focuses on strategic partnerships rather than formal blocs, treating various countries as partners to avoid the confrontational nature of alliances.

With regards to aid, while the US focuses on capacity building  China seems to believe that infrastructure development is more beneficial and would help the recipient country to develop its economy and be independent. Sri Lanka has experience with these US capacity building programmes and know that they are more often aimed at influencing the participants to change their political orientation and to be aligned with Western socio-political ideology. It is said that these programmes may have helped the US to bring about a regime change in the country. In Cambodia, too, the US has conducted capacity building programmes which the discerning Cambodians are suspicious of. China is the largest source of Foreign Direct Investment  and top trading partner for Cambodia, with investment totaling over $23 billion by mid-2024, heavily focused on manufacturing, infrastructure, and real estate. Key projects under the Belt and Road Initiative include highways, hydroelectric dams, special economic zones, and the $1.7 billion Funan Techo Canal.

Bid to counter Chinese influence

The US attempts to counter the burgeoning advances of China by use of force. The abduction of President Maduro of Venezuela, the country with the largest oil deposits and increasingly coming under the influence of China, was its diabolical response. This criminal act shows the poverty of the US strategy. What it could do instead is develop cordial relations and respect the rights these countries must have in deciding on their socio-political structures and help them to come out of poverty without bullying and exploiting their resources. If that had been their policy no other country would have an opportunity to get a foothold in their backyard.

Iran joined the BRICS and was in the process of mending its fences with Saudi Arabia, a staunch ally of the US, with Chinese mediation. Saudi Arabia was also joining the BRICS, which is not well-disposed towards the US. China was planing to invest heavily in Iran. China and Iran signed a 25-year, $400 billion strategic cooperation agreement in 2021, aiming to boost energy and infrastructure.. The US  and its ally in the Middle East, Israel, could not silently watch  those developments that they saw as a threat to their hegemony and dominance in the region. The US felt the need to thwart the Chinese advance and also the growth of BRICS while Israel saw it as an opportunity to wipe out the opposition to its master plan of total genocide of Palestinians and grabbing their ancestral land in whole.

After killing Iranian supreme leader and bombarding the country into what they thought was submission, Trump said he must have a say in the appointment of the next leader and also that Ayatollah’s son was not acceptable to him. He demanded unconditional surrender of Iran and said there probably would not be anybody in Iran even to declare a surrender. Iran has not only said it will never surrender but also gone ahead and appointed the murdered supreme leader’s son as his successor. Trump said the Iranian navy was gone, its air force was gone, missile stockpiles were gone and it was already defeated. But Iran miraculously continues to fire missiles at Israel and US bases in the neighbouring countries.

Iran probably will be defeated in the war, but whether the US and Israel will achieve their goals is most unlikely. The underlying reason for this conflict is the problem of Palestine. The two-state solution adopted by the UN could be the basis for peace. The US knows this but it does not want peace in the Middle East. It can exploit the oil resources in the region by keeping it under eternal turmoil. This policy perfectly suits Israel as well and it exploits the situation to commit genocide of the Palestinians and grab their land.

In this era of multipolarity with several countries possessing long range missiles and nuclear capability and several of those countries being not in friendly terms with either US or Israel, re-arming, re-grouping and re-emerging of forces that will continue the anti-imperialist, anti-expansionist struggle cannot be prevented.

If only US, Europe emulate China

If the US and also the influential Europe could see how beneficial the policy adopted by China could be to everybody living on this planet, there would be peace in the world. This is what the Chinese have been telling the West while it engages in confrontation and aggression against those who do not fall in line and abide by their dictate. Chinese have shown their readiness to help everybody without discrimination, whether foe or friend of the US. China has significantly increased its investment in Saudi Arabia and other US allies in the Middle East, with 2024 seeing a record high in BRI (Belt and Road Initiative) engagement—reaching $39 billion in construction contracts and investments in the region. Saudi Arabia has emerged as the top recipient of Chinese investment, with over 93 projects initiated since 2021 despite it being one of the staunchest allies of the US in the Middle East with a large US military presence. The US has its largest military base in the Middle East in Qatar. Yet China has heavily invested in Qatar, primarily focusing on energy, infrastructure, and financial sectors. Major investments include Sinopec and CNPC securing stakes in Qatar’s North Field East LNG expansion projects, as well as significant participation in infrastructure projects like the Hamad Port and Lusail Stadium.

Vietnam, a victim of US aggression, has recently signed a defence cooperation agreement with it. Yet China has invested heavily in Vietnam, becoming a top source of foreign direct investment and leading in new projects as of 2025–2026. Chinese firms are investing billions in high-tech, electronics, and manufacturing in Vietnam, with over $6.7 billion pledged between January and November 2025.

Based on reports from international human rights organisations, the U.S. Department of State, and various news analyses, Saudi Arabia is widely considered a highly repressive, authoritarian country with intensified crackdown on political dissent, freedom of expression, and human rights activists. In 2016, the kingdom executed 146 people, including a mass execution of 47 men on January 2. The US says it’s attacking Iran because it is repressive, but in truth it is doing so because Iran does not toe its line, Saudi Arabia does and goes scot-free.

All in all, in this imperfect world what everybody must do is help each other disregarding their imperfections. If the US and also Europe try to emulate China, the world, in the least, would be safer.

(Some information contained in this article is from Wikipedia.)

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

Tribute to a distinguished BOI leader

Published

on

Mr. Tuli Cooray, former Deputy Director General of the Board of Investment of Sri Lanka (BOI) and former Secretary General of the Joint Apparel Association Forum (JAAF), passed away three months ago, leaving a distinguished legacy of public service and dedication to national economic development.

An alumnus of the University of Colombo, Mr. Cooray graduated with a Special Degree in Economics. He began his career as a Planning Officer at the Ministry of Plan Implementation and later served as an Assistant Director in the Ministry of Finance (Planning Division).

He subsequently joined the Greater Colombo Economic Commission (GCEC), where he rose from Manager to Senior Manager and later Director. During this period, he also served at the Treasury as an Assistant Director. With the transformation of the GCEC into the BOI, he was appointed Executive Director of the Investment Department and later elevated to the position of Deputy Director General.

In recognition of his vast experience and expertise, he was appointed Director General of the Budget Implementation and Policy Coordination Division at the Ministry of Finance and Planning. Following his retirement from government service, he continued to contribute to the national economy through his work with JAAF.

Mr. Cooray was widely respected as a seasoned professional with exceptional expertise in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) and facilitating investor relations. His commitment, leadership, and humane qualities earned him the admiration and affection of colleagues across institutions.

He was also one of the pioneers of the BOI Past Officers’ Association, and his passing is deeply felt by its members. His demise has created a void that is difficult to fill, particularly within the BOI, where his contributions remain invaluable.

Mr. Cooray will be remembered not only for his professional excellence but also for his integrity, humility, and the lasting impact he made on those who had the privilege of working with him.

The BOI Past Officers’ Association

jagathcds@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers

Published

on

As a small and open country, Singapore will always be vulnerable to what happens around us. As Lee Kuan Yew used to say: “when elephants fight, the grass suffers, but when elephants make love, the grass also suffers“. Therefore, we must be aware of what is happening around us, and prepare ourselves for changes and surprises.” – Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, during the debate on the President’s Address in Singapore Parliament on 16 May, 2018, commenting on the uncertain external environment during the first Trump Administration.

“When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers”

is a well-known African proverb commonly used in geopolitics to describe smaller nations caught in the crossfire of conflicts between major powers. At the 1981 Commonwealth conference, when Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere quoted this Swahili proverb, the Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew famously retorted, “When elephants make love, the grass suffers, too”. In other words, not only when big powers (such as the US, Russia, EU, China or India) clash, the surrounding “grass” (smaller nations) get “trampled” or suffer collateral damage but even when big powers collaborate or enter into friendly agreements, small nations can still be disadvantaged through unintended consequences of those deals. Since then, Singaporean leaders have often quoted this proverb to highlight the broader reality for smaller states, during great power rivalry and from their alliances. They did this to underline the need to prepare Singapore for challenges stemming from the uncertain external environment and to maintain high resilience against global crises.

Like Singapore, as a small and open country, Sri Lanka too is always vulnerable to what happens around us. Hence, we must be alert to what is happening around us, and be ready not only to face challenges but to explore opportunities.

When Elephants Fight

To begin with, President Trump’s “Operation Epic Fury”.

Did we prepare adequately for changes and surprises that could arise from the deteriorating situation in the Gulf region? For example, the impact the conflict has on the safety and welfare of Sri Lankans living in West Asia or on our petroleum and LNG imports. The situation in the Gulf remains fluid with potential for further escalation, with the possibility of a long-term conflict.

The region, which is the GCC, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Syria and Azerbaijan (I believe exports to Azerbaijan are through Iran), accounts for slightly over $1 billion of our exports. The region is one of the most important markets for tea (US$546 million out of US$1,408 million in 2024. According to some estimates, this could even be higher). As we export mostly low-grown teas to these countries, the impact of the conflict on low-grown tea producers, who are mainly smallholders, would be extremely strong. Then there are other sectors like fruits and vegetables where the impact would be immediate, unless of course exporters manage to divert these perishable products to other markets. If the conflict continues for a few more weeks or months, managing these challenges will be a difficult task for the nation, not simply for the government. It is also necessary to remember the Russia – Ukraine war, now on to its fifth year, and its impact on Sri Lanka’s economy.

Mother of all bad timing

What is more unfortunate is that the Gulf conflict is occurring on top of an already intensifying global trade war. One observer called it the “mother of all bad timing”. The combination is deadly.

Early last year, when President Trump announced his intention to weaponise tariffs and use them as bargaining tools for his geopolitical goals, most observers anticipated that he would mainly use tariffs to limit imports from the countries with which the United States had large trade deficits: China, Mexico, Vietnam, the European Union, Japan and Canada. The main elephants, who export to the United States. But when reciprocal tariffs were declared on 2nd April, some of the highest reciprocal tariffs were on Saint Pierre and Miquelon (50%), a French territory off Canada with a population of 6000 people, and Lesotho (50%), one of the poorest countries in Southern Africa. Sri Lanka was hit with a 44% reciprocal tariff. In dollar terms, Sri Lanka’s goods trade deficit with the United States was very small (US$ 2.9 billion in 2025) when compared to those of China (US$ 295 billion in 2024) or Vietnam (US$ 123 billion in 2024).

Though the adverse impact of US additional ad valorem duty has substantially reduced due to the recent US Supreme Court decision on reciprocal tariffs, the turbulence in the US market would continue for the foreseeable future. The United States of America is the largest market for Sri Lanka and accounts for nearly 25% of our exports. Yet, Sri Lanka’s exports to the United States had remained almost stagnant (around the US $ 3 billion range) during the last ten years, due to the dilution of the competitive advantage of some of our main export products in that market. The continued instability in our largest market, where Sri Lanka is not very competitive, doesn’t bode well for Sri Lanka’s economy.

When Elephants Make Love

In rapidly shifting geopolitical environments, countries use proactive anticipatory diplomacy to minimise the adverse implications from possible disruptions and conflicts. Recently concluded Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations between India and the EU (January 2026) and India and the UK (May 2025) are very good examples for such proactive diplomacy. These negotiations were formally launched in June 2007 and were on the back burner for many years. These were expedited as strategic responses to growing U.S. protectionism. Implementation of these agreements would commence during this year.

When negotiations for a free trade agreement between India and the European Union (which included the United Kingdom) were formally launched, anticipating far-reaching consequences of such an agreement on other developing countries, the Commonwealth Secretariat requested the University of Sussex to undertake a study on a possible implication of such an agreement on other low-income developing countries. The authors of that study had considered the impact of an EU–India Free Trade Agreement on the trade of excluded countries and had underlined, “The SAARC countries are, by a long way, the most vulnerable to negative impacts from the FTA. Their exports are more similar to India’s…. Bangladesh is most exposed in the EU market, followed by Pakistan and Sri Lanka.”

So, now these agreements are finalised; what will be the implications of these FTAs between India and the UK and the EU on Sri Lanka? According to available information, the FTA will be a game-changer for the Indian apparel exporters, as it would provide a nearly ten per cent tariff advantage to them. That would level the playing field for India, vis-à-vis their regional competitors. As a result, apparel exports from India to the UK and the EU are projected to increase significantly by 2030. As the sizes of the EU’s and the UK’s apparel markets are not going to expand proportionately, these growths need to come from the market shares of other main exporters like Sri Lanka.

So, “also, when elephants make love, the grass suffers.”

Impact on Sri Lanka

As a small, export dependent country with limited product and market diversification, Sri Lanka will always be vulnerable to what happens in our main markets. Therefore, we must be aware of what is happening in those markets, and prepare ourselves to face the challenges proactively. Today, amid intense geopolitical conflicts, tensions and tariff shifts, countries adopt high agility and strategic planning. If we look at what our neighbours have been doing in London, Brussels and Tokyo, we can learn some lessons on how to navigate through these turbulences.

(The writer is a retired public servant and can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

by Gomi Senadhira

Continue Reading

Opinion

QR-based fuel quota

Published

on

The introduction of the QR code–based fuel quota system can be seen as a timely and necessary measure, implemented as part of broader austerity efforts to manage limited fuel resources. In the face of ongoing global fuel instability and economic challenges, such a system is aimed at ensuring equitable distribution and preventing excessive consumption. While it is undeniable that this policy may disrupt the daily routines of certain segments of the population, it is important for citizens to recognize the larger national interest at stake and cooperate with these temporary measures until stability returns to the global fuel market.

At the same time, this initiative presents an important opportunity for the Government to address long-standing gaps in regulatory enforcement. In particular, the implementation of the QR code system could have been strategically linked to the issuance of valid revenue licenses for vehicles. Restricting QR code access only to vehicles that are properly registered and have paid their revenue dues would have helped strengthen compliance and improve state revenue collection.

Available data from the relevant authorities indicate that a significant number of vehicles—especially three-wheelers and motorcycles—continue to operate without valid revenue licences. This represents a substantial loss of income to the State and highlights a weakness in enforcement mechanisms. By integrating the fuel quota system with revenue license verification, the government could have effectively encouraged vehicle owners to regularise their documentation while simultaneously improving fiscal discipline.

In summary, while the QR code fuel system is a commendable step toward managing scarce resources, aligning it with existing regulatory requirements would have amplified its benefits. Such an approach would not only support fuel conservation but also enhance government revenue and promote greater accountability among vehicle owners.

Sariputhra
Colombo 05

Continue Reading

Trending