Features
HAVE YOU EVER EVEN BEEN TO NEPAL?

(Excerpted from Fallen Leaves, an anthology of memoirs by LC Arulpragasam)
In 1962, I joined FAO as the Land Tenure Officer in its Regional Office in Bangkok. Within six months I was told that I would be sacked within a week unless I retracted a certain position that I had taken on land reform in Nepal. This is the story.
The Government of Nepal had passed a tenancy reform law in 1962, based on the advice of the Ford Foundation (USA). The law provided for security of tenure along with reduced rents for tenants of agricultural land. Its provisions were roughly in the following terms. Whoever is a tenant of an agricultural land on a specified date (x) will have permanent rights of tenancy. Such a tenant cannot be evicted as long as he pays the landlord a rent of 25 per cent of the crop each year. This was as opposed to the 50 per cent of the crop that was habitually being charged by landlords in Nepal at that time. The law was praised in international circles as a brilliant piece of legislation, because it was short and simple, making any legal challenge difficult.
The legislation was sent to me for comments by my boss, Dr. Erich Jacoby, Chief of the Land Tenure Branch of FAO, Rome. I wrote back to say that while the law was short and direct, there was an implicit problem in its very first words, which said: ‘whoever is a tenant of an agricultural land on date x…’ The law did not specify how it would be decided, whether there was a tenant on the land, and how he would be identified. In practice, every landlord would say that there was no tenant on his/her land – and hence there would be no tenants to benefit from this ‘excellent’ law.
One could theoretically fall back on the land records to ascertain who was a tenant on any particular date. But it was known that Nepal did not have such land records – least of all, a record of tenancy. Some identification of each parcel of land, its extent, its ownership and tenancy would be needed for implementing such reforms – and this was completely lacking in Nepal at that time. This is in contrast to the comprehensive system of land records in British India, which provided the basis of its land tax system, whereby all lands were surveyed and registered, showing the names of all owners and their tenants, if any.
There was an even more serious problem. My experience in Sri Lanka showed that landlords would evict their tenants, claiming that they cultivated the land themselves. Or through daily-paid workers, leaving no tenants to benefit from the new law. In a semi-feudal country like Nepal at that time, it was very likely that the tenants would be intimidated by their landlords, through threat of eviction, cut-off of credit or even violence, to make them surrender their rights as tenants. Not being able to defy their landlords, they would even abjectly agree to remain as ‘hidden tenants’ with no rights under the law. In exchange, they would be allowed to continue to cultivate the land, at whatever rent the landlord decreed, and subject to eviction at any time.
Everything would depend on the mechanics by which the tenant of any land was to be identified and recorded, prior to the enforcement of the law. The law, however, by ignoring this fundamental problem, left the tenants worse off than before, subject to immediate eviction by landlords who wished to evade the new law. I had only given my above opinion to my boss, because he had asked for it. I did not know at that time that it would cause an international incident!
About one month later, FAO was informed by the UN Bureau of Public Administration, which was executing the project, that the identification and registration of tenancy rights was to be done by a cadastral surveyor, who would survey and register all agricultural lands. This left the difficult task of recording tenancy rights to a lowly surveyor (called an amin in Nepal), who was paid only the equivalent of US $1 per month at that time, thus making him utterly susceptible to bribery and intimidation. With these probable outcomes in mind, I wrote to my boss, who had again requested my opinion, that the process of registration of tenants proposed by the UN was likely to result in the cadastral surveyor merely recording that there were no tenants on the land (because the landlords had brought pressure on them) leaving no tenants to benefit from the reforms!
Little did we anticipate the reaction of the United Nations Office. First we received a reply from the Director of the UN Bureau of Public Administration, Mr. Coates, stating that such recording of ownership and tenancy rights had been done all the time by cadastral surveyors in India. He claimed that he himself, as an ex-member of the Indian Civil Service (ICS), had on many occasions adjudicated such ownership and tenancy rights based on the cadastral surveyor’s findings ‘under the peepul tree’.
When my boss persisted with my opinion, the UN Headquarters in New York complained directly to the Director-General of FAO that FAO was obstructing their programme on unfounded and uninformed grounds. This was followed also by an official complaint to the Director-General of FAO by the Nepalese Government alleging the same. Unfortunately, the Director-General of FAO, Mr. B.R. Sen had himself been an ex-member of the hallowed Indian Civil Service. He dismissed FAO’s stand as uninformed, stating that he himself had decided such ownership disputes on the basis of cadastral surveys on so many occasions ‘under the peepul tree’! Learning that I was the culprit, he ordered that I go immediately to Nepal and officially apologize and retract FAO’s position. If I did not do this within one week, my employment was to be terminated! At this juncture my boss, the Assistant Director-General in charge of the FAO Regional Office tried to protect me. But when he heard the full story, he was utterly dismayed. Although he was a Pakistani, he too had been a former member of the ICS: how many times, had he too decided such cases, based on a cadastral survey, ‘under the peepul tree’, with no difficulty (that I had predicted) at all!
By this time I did not know which I hated more, the Indian Civil Service or the peepul tree! All the top administrators in the UN system at that time seemed to be British or Indian retirees from the prestigious Indian Civil Service (ICS). So I was beginning to see this as a dispute between the ex-officials of the ICS and myself, from the Ceylon Civil Service (CCS). I still felt that I was right and that they (including my top boss in FAO, the Director-General himself) were wrong.
First, although they knew cadastral survey and land administration, this was not the issue. For the issue was whether the process that they advocated could actually identify and register a tenant under the shadow of land reform. They had actually never done this! Second, whereas they had all decided on ownership and thought that they had decided on tenancy, their inquiries had only been to identify the owners of the land for tax purposes, while completely depending on the landlords to supply the name of the tenant for the full land record.
Whereas the landlords had previously willingly provided the names of their tenants to the Indian Civil Servants, the same landlords now wished to deny that they were any tenants on their land at all! Thus the question was whether the procedures used in India for deciding on ownership for tax purposes would be adequate for deciding on tenancy for land reform purposes! Thirdly, although these top ex-ICS officers had years of experience in land administration, they had no experience of land reform.
Thus their long experience in deciding quite a different issue, in quite a different era, in quite a different social and legal dynamic, was now the biggest obstacle to their understanding the different nature of the problem and of finding a suitable solution. In the end, they turned it into a personal problem. For whereas they had all been to Nepal, it was known that I had not! It got even worse when they saw me, for I looked even younger than my 32 years at that time!
Although I was convinced that I was right, I now had no option but to go – as instructed – to Nepal to eat humble pie and retract my position. I was snubbed by the UNDP Representative in Delhi – and it got worse when I reached Nepal. The Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Planning refused to see me. I was sent down to the Joint Secretary who was unnecessarily brusque. Although I had decided to capitulate and eat my piece of humble pie, I had to make a pretence of looking into the matter. So I asked to visit a village where the cadastral survey and land registration had already taken place according to the procedures prescribed by the UN. The Joint Secretary asked me where I wished to go. Not knowing anything about Nepal, I jabbed wildly at the map. He remarked drily that I was pointing to the Himalayas, but he could get me as far as Pokhara in the foothills, but that I would have to walk from there!
So I set out early next morning to Pokhara by plane, which in those days landed in a grass field. Accompanied by a senior surveyor who was to be my interpreter and guide, we walked for a full day to get to the village that I had fortuitously chosen. It was a thrilling experience, walking in the silence of the mountains with the snow-clad Himalayan peaks towering above me. In one place, I also had the thunder of water from a subterranean river shaking the ground beneath me. I reached the selected village by nightfall. When I examined the cadastral map and land record prepared by the cadastral surveyor, it showed that all the lands were cultivated by their owners, either as owner-cultivators or through daily-paid workers supervised by them. Since the record showed no tenants, there would be no beneficiaries of the land reform in this village.
The next morning at daybreak, I positioned myself on the path to the fields, so that I could meet the farmers going to and from their fields. I tackled one in about every four farmers, asking more or less the same question: ‘Are you a tenant?’ Every one of them answered that he was either an owner cultivator or a daily-paid worker, although most seemed to be too poor to be owners of their own land. I repeated the process at eventide, when the farmers returned from their fields, but I always received the same reply. I spent the whole of the next day asking the same question and getting the same answer. In desperation, I requested a meeting of all farmers on my last evening in the hope that group dynamics might reveal a glimpse of the true picture. But even at this meeting, I received the same response.
At this point, the only well-dressed man spoke up, saying: ‘Sir, because of your perseverance and hard work, I need to speak out, since none of the others here can afford to do so. These poor men here have been lying to you for the past two days: they are all tenants. They have been informed in advance of your arrival and have been instructed by their landlords to say that they are not tenants. In fact, they have been threatened with eviction and violence – and two of them, even with death’. At these words, there was a babble of voices, all wanting to speak. They burst out that they were indeed tenants, but had been threatened with eviction by their landlords if they claimed the same. I invited each one to speak – and each one said the same thing.
I then took out the already completed cadastral map and went over it with them. I asked the entire group whether there was a tenant on each lot of land, going over all the lots in turn. They unanimously answered: ’Yes, so-and-so is the tenant’ in respect of each lot, with 100 per cent agreement. After recording the name of the tenant and of the owner against each piece of land, I had a new land record made, which was confirmed by the entire village. And it was the exact opposite of that recorded by the cadastral surveyor, following the procedures prescribed by the UN!
Whereas the latter showed that there were no tenants on any of these lands, my records showed that there was 100 per cent tenancy on all lands in this particular village. This meant that if the land reform had proceeded on the basis of the cadastral records prepared by the Government and championed by my own FAO Director-General, there would not have been any tenants to protect and thus no beneficiaries under the land reform law!
Having got the new land record confirmed by the senior surveyor, I then had to walk an extra day to get the endorsement of the Zonal Commissioner. On the next day, in Kathmandu, I had to report my findings to the Joint Secretary, who had also invited Dr. Lindsay, the author of the land reform legislation, to the meeting. They were astounded to find that their system of identifying tenants had provided 100 per cent wrong information. Instead of retracting my position and apologizing to the Government and the UN, I was now able to prove that I had been right all along, even though I had never been to Nepal before!
I also became a favourite of the Ministry at that time. The Minister himself would come to the airport to meet me on each of my subsequent visits. The Government requested me to formulate an FAO project for assistance to its land reform programme. I introduced a new system for the identification of tenants based on the participation of both the tenants and owners through public village meetings – which was adopted by the Government in the 1960s. This episode proved to be a personal and professional triumph for me in the early days, since I had proved even the Director-General of FAO and his Assistant-Director-General for the Asian Region, as well as the UNDP, the UN Bureau of Public Administration, the Ford Foundation and the Government of Nepal, all to be wrong! I was only 32 years old at that time – and had never been to Nepal when I first gave my opinion on the issue.
Features
The Truth will set us free – I

Sri Lanka becoming a Macbethian sick state?
The traditional ritual of anointing medicinal oil (or ‘hisa thel gaema’ in Sinhalese, literally, applying oil to the head) is unique to the Sinhala Aluth Avurudda observances. This year, the ritual was performed at the auspicious moment of 9:04 a.m. (Sri Lanka time) on Wednesday April 16. It was observed at appointed venues across the country at the same time. The anointing was done, as usual, mostly by Buddhist monks in their monasteries.
Where they were not available for the purpose, a senior citizen would do the needful. The oil anointing ceremony was held to invoke blessings of good health on all the individuals who subjected themselves to the ritual. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya was shown participating in the oil anointing ceremony at the historic Kolonnawa Raja Maha Viharaya. There were many social media videos showing similar oil anointing scenes that included even elephants and hippos in a zoo receiving the compassionate treatment; this is not seen as going too far with traditions, for extending loving-kindness even to animals is taken for granted in the majority Buddhist Sri Lanka. Watching this ritual (that used to be so familiar for me in my childhood and youth) from abroad I couldn’t help my eyes filling with tears, feeling kind of homesick, in spite of me having spent more than forty-three years of my adult life living and working away from my Mother Country Sri Lanka.
Though usually Buddhist monks do the anointing, it is not considered a religious practice by the ordinary Buddhists. It is only a part of the completely secular Sinhala Aluth Avurudda festival. The most important annual religious festival for the Sinhalese (especially Sinhala Buddhists) is Vesak, which will be held next month. However, the oil anointing ceremony impresses on the Avurudu celebrants the great importance of maintaining their physical and mental health throughout the coming year, reflecting the high level of attention that our traditional culture pays to that objective.
However, the actual discrepancy that is noticed between the ideal and the reality in the mundane world, as in other countries, is a different matter. Shining beacons like ideals of a long-evolved culture are important for what they are; their importance doesn’t go away because those ideals are only imperfectly realised by the people of that culture. But the values endure.
The news of this happy occasion and my awareness of a deepening political and cultural malaise in my beloved Motherland back home reminded me of a book I read during the Covid-19 lockdown period of 2020-2022: OUR MALADY by American historian and public intellectual, the Yale University professor Timothy D. Snyder published in 2020. The book, whose subtitle is ‘Liberty and Solidarity’, is about the weakness of the American healthcare system that he himself got a taste of, privately.
Professor Snyder came to know first-hand how America failed its citizens in the public healthcare sphere as an inmate of a hospital ward, where he was admitted to the emergency room at midnight on December 29, 2019. He was complaining of a condition of severe bodily ‘malaise’. Doctors later told him that he had an abscess the size of a baseball in his liver. The emergency operation to remove the abscess was done after seventeen hours of his having had to wait confined to a hospital bed!
‘Rage’ is the word he repeatedly uses to describe how he felt during his hospitalisation. He was not raging against God or any particular person or a group or the bacteria that caused his illness. ‘I raged against a world where I was not’, Snyder writes in the Prologue to the book (implying how much he was angry about there not being a healthy enough healthcare system to look after Americans who fell ill like himself. The book grew out of entries he made in a diary that he maintained while recuperating in hospital. Proficient in a number of European languages including English, French and Polish, he adopts a sort of poetic idiom to deal with his naturally dull subject.
He imagined he was not suffering in solitude, though. He thought about other Americans in his situation, and empathised with them. The absence of a sound healthcare system is America’s malady according to Snyder. Probably, the current situation in America is different, having changed for the better. We must remember that the time he is talking about was the last year of the first term (January 20, 2017-January 20, 2021) of the 45th US president Donald Trump of the Republican Party.
Currently, Trump is serving as the 47th US president. The ideas that professor Snyder develops in the book have global topical relevance, I think. They are organised into four Chapters or ‘Lessons’ as he dubs them, which in my opinion, have implications that could be utilised even by the citizens of the Macbethian ‘sick state’ that Sri Lanka has become today, complete with a Macbeth (though a muppet) and a shadowy but more determined Lady Macbeth.
Timothy Snyder offers the four Lessons for his fellow Americans, and by extension, to fellow humans around the world including us, Sri Lankans. Perhaps these are uniquely American issues, with little direct relevance to a small country like Sri Lanka with no stake in the international pharmaceutical industry. But then no country can escape from the implications of the following facts (taken from Wikipedia): In 2023, the global pharmaceutical industry earned revenues of US $ 1.48 trillion, whereas the top 10 arms manufacturing companies earned only US $ 632 billion. In the same year, the global life and health insurance carriers industry, which is the biggest industry in the world in terms of revenue, earned US $ 4.3 trillion.
Our own late medical professor Senake Bibile (1920-1977), a pharmacology expert and a rare philanthropist and compassionate social activist of the Trotskyite Sama Samaja party persuasion who always had the welfare of the suffering poor at heart, met his death allegedly in mysterious circumstances in Guyana where he was attending a UN conference, promoting the domestic drug policy that he had developed for Sri Lanka, as a model for use in other countries and by the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) for developing policies for ‘rational pharmaceutical use’.
It goes without saying that Sri Lankans are also highly vulnerable to the deleterious effects of the inhuman excesses of the purely profit oriented international Big Pharma; these harmful consequences get transferred to the innocent citizens magnified several times through the unholy alliance between the local corporate drugs mafiosi and corrupt politicians. Be that as it may, Snyder adds another three equally important related points, covering all four, each in a Lesson that must receive the utmost attention of all adult Sri Lankans: health care for children and children’s education, truth in politics, and the supremacy of the doctors’ role in a malady situation. We will look at these briefly, intermittently taking our eyes off America to reflect on our own country Sri Lanka.
Lesson 1 is ‘Health care is a human right’.
Despite its wealth, professor Snyder complains, America is a sick nation; life expectancy is falling for Americans. Moody’s Analytics suggests that US millennials will die younger than their parents or grandparents, though there is no lack of money spent. What is causing this decline in life expectancy? Snyder’s unsettling answer is that the American healthcare system prioritises profit over people’s lives. America still lacks a universal healthcare system, in spite of being a supporter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and this leads to unequal access to health care, as Snyder asserts.
Exorbitantly priced commercial medicine has a devastating effect on the protection of the health-care rights of the people. It has robbed the American citizens of their health, in Snyder’s view. The American health-care system’s profit-focussed approach and lack of investment in protective equipment for medical professionals jeopardised their safety during the Covid-19 pandemic. In America, 20 million people lost their jobs and over 150,000 died from pandemic. Health insurance became too expensive, and health care unaffordable. Without a diagnosis, many became dangerously ill or unknowingly infected others with the virus.
Though poor, Sri Lanka beats America in respect of looking after public health. It has a better record in providing satisfactory health care for the citizens. The state runs an almost 100% free medicare service for all the citizens. There is a (kind of) parallel paid private hospital system as well, that caters to the better off segment of the population that can resort to it if they prefer to do so. This potentially eases the burden on the free state medical services, which can then focus more on attending to the needs of the economically weaker section of the population.
The maintenance by the state of such a public welfare-based healthcare system is desired and supported by our dominant socio-cultural background that strongly resonates with the humanistic spirit of the Aluth Avurudda that prioritises health over all forms of wealth. This is embodied in the principle Arogya parama labha ‘Good health is the greatest wealth’, the antithesis of the American attitude towards citizens’ health.
Sri Lanka was among the handful of countries that contained the Covid-19 pandemic most efficiently, minimizing deaths, whereas in America, according to Snyder, flaws in the healthcare system were aggravated by the contagion. This led to more deaths in America than in other wealthy nations like Japan and Germany. But the not so well-to-do Sri Lanka escaped with a minimum number of Covid-caused fatalities amidst obstacles mounted by antinationalist ill-wishers as I saw it at the time. That is Professor Snyder’s Lesson 1, which is about the human right of easily accessible health care. Sri Lanka is actually ahead of America in this respect in spite of relative poverty.
by Rohana R. Wasala
(To be concluded.)
Features
Four-day work week; too much rigidity; respectful farewell

I received a video that announced Japan was considering changing to a four-day work week. Suspicious of such news in my cell phone, I googled and found that certain countries had already opted for work weeks of four days and thus three-day weekends. This change too is a consequence of closedowns of work due to the Covid pandemic.
“Several countries are experimenting with or have implemented four-day work weeks, including Belgium, Iceland, Spain, the United Kingdom and Portugal. Other countries like Germany, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and the US have also shown interest in, or have tested the four-day work week model.”
The video I got was about Japan changing its government work week to four days from mid-April with many projected objectives. One is to improve government employees’ work-life balance and to address the country’s declining birth rate. Also, the hours of the work day are to be reduced so parents can spend more time caring for their kids termed: ‘Childcare partial leave’. Flexible work hours for women to be implemented so choosing between careers and family will not be necessary.
In Germany experimental trials were carried out in 2023-24 involving 43 companies; 73% plan to continue with the new work structure. Noted for productivity and efficiency, Germany has in addition to one day less working, on average only 34 hours per week. A five-day week of 9 to 5 has 40 work hours per week. Fewer hours at work has been found to promote smarter and more focussed effort with employees happier and more engaged.
Long ago in the 1970s Cassandra shifted from employment in the private sector to a semi government job. She was shocked at the laissez faire attitude of her co-workers in an information centre. Most came to work at around 9.00 am: discussed the bus journey and home; had breakfast; read the morning newspapers; did a bit of work and were ready to have lunch by 12.00 noon. Two hours for this and half for a small snooze. Work till 3.30 pm or so when books/files were closed and grooming selves commenced, to depart at 4.30 pm sharp.
The work ethic in a remote government school and a private school in a city were as opposed to each other as the proverbial chalk to cheese. Do minimum against teaching; don’t care attitude to dedication and commitment; take leave to maximum vs hardly taking leave in consideration of the fact parents of students pay fees; non disciplining principals to dedicated pedagogues who set an example.
Cassandra supposes, and correctly, that with the change of government and a system change, even though many offices are overstaffed, employees put in a solid day’s work. The public is better served, most definitely.
Hence how would it be for Sri Lanka to lop off one work day a week? There will certainly be benefits, but aren’t many of us complaining about the presence of too many public holidays; we enjoy 24 to 30 a year including every full moon Poya Day. A travesty!
The utter mayhem of Poya weekends
Those who lived through the period when the calendar in this overzealous Buddhist country went lunar (sic) and made the four Poya Days of a month and half the pre-Poya Day as the country’s weekend. It was a total mess since many a week had more than five week days in it till the moon changed from one phase to another. Ceylon was completely out of sync with the rest of the world. That was in 1966 with Dudley Senanayake as Prime Minister. Mercifully, in 1970, the Saturday Sunday weekend was reverted to, and sanity regained.
Conclusion is that making our week of four days’ work and weekend three days has to be carefully considered, tested and implemented, or kept as it is. Better it would be if government offices were pruned of excess staff recruited on politicians’ orders and genuinely legitimate officers made to work efficiently.
VVIP Mother in queue
A photograph made the rounds on social media of a frail looking, white haired lady in a queue in Kandy moving slowly to pay homage to the Sacred Tooth Relic. It was said to be President AKD’s mother who was hospitalised just a couple of months ago. Admired is her devotion as well as the fact she came incognito; not informing her son of her intended travel.
But Cass is censorious. Here was a genuine case of needing a bit of stretching of points and helping her to fulfil her desire to pay homage with ease. After all, he is working hard and very probably long hours to get this country on an even keel. He needs appreciation and if he refuses advantages, let a less able person benefit.
A truly honourable Pope
Roman Catholics across the globe mourn the death of the 266th Pope on the Monday after the Easter weekend; and the world respects and reveres him. People comment he must have willed himself to live through Easter, even presenting himself to crowds gathered in the huge grounds of St Peter’s Basilica.
Pope Francis was born Jorge Bergoglio on December 17, 1936, in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He was inspired to join the Society of Jesus or Jesuits in 1958 after a serious illness. Ordained a Catholic priest in 1969, he was the Jesuit provincial superior in Argentina from 1973 to 79. He became the Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and was created a cardinal in 2001 by Pope John Paul II. He was elected in the papal conclave following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI as head of the Catholic Church and Sovereign of the Vatican City State in 1913, claiming many firsts: a Jesuit becoming Pope; first from America, from the Southern Hemisphere. He chose his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi, kind to all living beings. “Throughout his public life, Francis was noted for his humility, emphasis on God’s mercy, international visibility as pope, concern for the poor and commitment to interreligious dialogue. He was known for having a less formal approach to the papacy than his predecessors.”
We remember his visit to Sri Lanka from January 13 to 15, 2015, when he travelled to the Shrine of Our Lady of Madhu and canonized Sri Lanka’s first saint, Joseph Vaz. He conducted a Mass and bestowed blessings to the multitude at Galle Face Green. As he entered and left the Green, he placed his hands on the heads of infants, children, the very poor, the old and infirm; never mind oil and dirt on heads. A truly great and good person.
Features
Kashmir terror attack underscores need for South Asian stability and amity

The most urgent need for the South Asian region right now, in the wake of the cold-blooded killing by gunmen of nearly 30 local tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir two days back, is the initiation of measures that could ensure regional stability and peace. The state actors that matter most in this situation are India and Pakistan and it would be in the best interests of the region for both countries to stringently refrain from succumbing to knee-jerk reactions in the face of any perceived provocations arising from the bloodshed.
The consequences for the countries concerned and the region could be grave if the terror incident leads to stepped-up friction and hostility between India and Pakistan. Some hardline elements in India, for instance, are on record in the international media as calling on the Indian state to initiate tough military action against Pakistan for the Kashmiri terror in question and a positive response to such urgings could even lead to a new India-Pakistan war.
Those wishing South Asia well are likely to advocate maximum restraint by both states and call for negotiations by them to avert any military stand-offs and conflicts that could prove counter-productive for all quarters concerned. This columnist lends his pen to such advocacy.
Right now in Sri Lanka, nationalistic elements in the country’s South in particular are splitting hairs over an MoU relating to security cooperation Sri Lanka has signed with India. Essentially, the main line of speculation among these sections is that Sri Lanka is coming under the suzerainty of India, so to speak, in the security sphere and would be under its dictates in the handling of its security interests. In the process, these nationalistic sections are giving fresh life to the deep-seated anti-India phobia among sections of the Sri Lankan public. The eventual result will be heightened, irrational hostility towards India among vulnerable, unenlightened Sri Lankans.
Nothing new will be said if the point is made that such irrational fears with respect to India are particularly marked among India’s smaller neighbouring states and their publics. Needless to say, collective fears of this kind only lead to perpetually strained relations between India and her neighbours, resulting in regional disunity, which, of course would not be in South Asia’s best interests.
SAARC is seen as ‘dead’ by some sections in South Asia and its present dysfunctional nature seems to give credence to this belief. Continued friction between India and Pakistan is seen as playing a major role in such inner paralysis and this is, no doubt, the main causative factor in SARRC’s current seeming ineffectiveness.
However, the widespread anti-India phobia referred to needs to be factored in as playing a role in SAARC’s lack of dynamism and ‘life’ as well. If democratic governments go some distance in exorcising such anti-Indianism from their people’s psyches, some progress could be made in restoring SAARC to ‘life’ and the latter could then play a constructive role in defusing India-Pakistan tensions.
It does not follow that if SAARC was ‘alive and well’, security related incidents of the kind that were witnessed in India-administered Kashmir recently would not occur. This is far from being the case, but if SAARC was fully operational, the states concerned would be in possession of the means and channels of resolving the issues that flow from such crises with greater amicability and mutual accommodation.
Accordingly, the South Asian Eight would be acting in their interests by seeking to restore SAARC back to ‘life’. An essential task in this process is the elimination of mutual fear and suspicion among the Eight and the states concerned need to do all that they could to eliminate any fixations and phobias that the countries have in relation to each other.
It does not follow from the foregoing that the SAARC Eight should not broad base their relations and pull back from fostering beneficial ties with extra-regional countries and groupings that have a bearing on their best interests. On the contrary, each SAARC country’s ties need to be wide-ranging and based on the principle that each such state would be a friend to all countries and an enemy of none as long as the latter are well-meaning.
The foregoing sharp focus on SAARC and its fortunes is necessitated by the consideration that the developmental issues in particular facing the region are best resolved by the region itself on the basis of its multiple material and intellectual resources. The grouping should not only be revived but a revisit should also be made to its past programs; particularly those which related to intra-regional conflict resolution. Thus, talking to each other under a new visionary commitment to SAARC collective wellbeing is crucially needed.
On the question of ties with India, it should be perceived by the latter’s smaller neighbours that there is no getting away from the need to foster increasingly closer relations with India, today a number one global power.
This should not amount to these smaller neighbours surrendering their rights and sovereignty to India. Far from it. On the contrary these smaller states should seek to craft mutually beneficial ties with India. It is a question of these small states following a truly Non-aligned foreign policy and using their best diplomatic and political skills to structure their ties with India in a way that would be mutually beneficial. It is up to these neighbours to cultivate the skills needed to meet these major challenges.
Going ahead, it will be in South Asia’s best interests to get SAARC back on its feet once again. If this aim is pursued with visionary zeal and if SAARC amity is sealed once and for all intra-regional friction and enmities could be put to rest. What smaller states should avoid scrupulously is the pitting of extra-regional powers against India and Pakistan in their squabbles with either of the latter. This practice has been pivotal in bringing strife and contention into South Asia and in dividing the region against itself.
Accordingly, the principal challenge facing South Asia is to be imbued once again with the SAARC spirit. The latter spirit’s healing powers need to be made real and enduring. Thus will we have a region truly united in brotherhood and peace.
-
Business7 days ago
DIMO pioneers major fleet expansion with Tata SIGNA Prime Movers for ILM
-
News6 days ago
Family discovers rare species thought to be extinct for over a century in home garden
-
Features3 days ago
RuGoesWild: Taking science into the wild — and into the hearts of Sri Lankans
-
Foreign News6 days ago
China races robots against humans in Beijing half marathon
-
Editorial7 days ago
Selective use of PTA
-
News3 days ago
Orders under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruptions Act No. 9 of 2023 for concurrence of parliament
-
Features5 days ago
New species of Bronzeback snake, discovered in Sri Lanka
-
Features6 days ago
The ironies of history