News
India maintains ‘loud silence’ on Taiwan crisis, its ‘One China’ policy
SL too on agenda
BY S VENKAT NARAYAN
Our Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI, August 6: India is maintaining a studied “loud silence” on the tensions between China and the United States and the developments in the Taiwan Straits in the wake of US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s controversial visit to Taipei last week. The decision to say nothing on the raging issue is deliberate to avoid controversy, say officials and experts.While other countries in the region reiterated their One China policy, India chose to say nothing on the subject either. In fact, India has stopped talking about it since at least 2008.
India has omitted any mention of the growing crisis over Taiwan even in the talks External Affairs Minister Dr Subrahmanyam Jaishankar has held on the sidelines of the meeting of the Association of SouthEast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Cambodian capital Phnom Penh.On Thursday, Jaishankar attended the ASEAN-India summit, and held talks with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, as well as Foreign Ministers of Australia, Sri Lanka and Vietnam.
Jaishankar called the talks with Ministers “productive” and “warm”, and said he had discussed a number of issues with ASEAN countries including the “Indo-Pacific, UNCLOS, connectivity, COVID-19, terrorism, cybersecurity, Ukraine and Myanmar”, without referencing the Taiwan situation.
The US State Department said in its readout of the Jaishankar-Blinken meeting: “The two exchanged views on global and regional issues, including Russia’s brutal aggression against Ukraine and the implications it has had on food insecurity around the world.”
They also discussed “Sri Lanka’s economic crisis and promoting accountability for the [Myanmar] regime’s atrocities,” it added.Officials and experts said India’s decision not to comment on the situation unfolding after Pelosi’s visit to Taipei, followed by China’s sharp reaction, military exercises and missile tests, is a “carefully decided” one. It is aimed at ensuring that India does not wish to cause a controversy with China at a sensitive time in Sino-Indian border talks. New Delhi does not wish to claim allegiance to the “One China policy” either. Said a former senior official, now retired: “A loud silence is probably the best response to the situation.”
India has indeed followed the One China policy since 1949. It does not recognize any government other than the one in Beijing. India only conducts trade and cultural ties with Taiwan.New Delhi stopped mentioning the so-called One China policy in official statements and joint declarations after 2008. According to officials at the time, the government had taken the decision after a series of Chinese statements claiming Arunachal Pradesh as a part of the Chinese territory, renaming Arunachal towns with Mandarin names, and issuing “stapled visas” to Indian citizens who were residents of Jammu and Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh.
In 2010, during meetings with President Hu Jintao in Brasilia, and Premier Wen Jiabao, joint statements with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh did not refer to the One-China principle. One senior retired Indian official explained, “The thinking was: Why is there a need to reiterate the One-China policy when China was not taking our sensitivities into account?” It was not a change in policy but a decision to not repeat it.
“We conveyed that if the Chinese side desired India to state the One-China policy, then it should respect a One-India principle,” said another former official.
Officials confirmed that in 2014, then External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had endorsed the decision, too.However, in separate statements issued last week, ASEAN Foreign Ministers as well as countries in the region like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Pakistan had pointedly affirmed their commitment to the “One-China policy.”
Sri Lanka’s President Ranil Wickremesinghe on Thursday affirmed the island nation’s commitment to the ‘One China Policy’ and asked countries to “refrain from provocations” in a message apparently directed to the United States.
“Pakistan is deeply concerned over the evolving situation in the Taiwan Strait, which has serious implications for regional peace and stability,” said the Pakistani Foreign Office’s statement. It added that Pakistan “stands by” the One-China principle. Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry reiterated its “firm adherence” to the One-China policy as well.
The ASEAN statement “reiterated member-states’ support for their respective One-China Policy.” It also warned that destabilisation in the region could spark “miscalculation, serious confrontation, open conflicts and unpredictable consequences among major powers”.
Even G-7 countries, that include the United States and Japan, said there was “no change in the respective One-China policies, where applicable, and basic positions on Taiwan of the G7 members”.
However, the statement strongly criticised the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for its “threatening” and “escalatory” response to the Pelosi visit, which prompted Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to cancel his meeting with the Japanese Foreign Minister in Phnom Penh.
News
Ex-lawmakers group calls for IPU’s intervention to check “irregularities” in Parliament
Association of Former Members of Parliament of Sri Lanka has requested the Inter-Parliamentary Union to inquire into, what the group calls, institutional irregularities in Parliament.
The Association cited the decision taken by the Attorney General not to appear for Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremeratne, in a case filed in the Court of Appeal by sacked Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne, to underscore the need for IPU’s intervention.
The following is the text of the letter signed by former JVP MP Premasiri Manage, on behalf of the Association: We write to Your Excellency on behalf of the Association of Former Members of Parliament of Sri Lanka, an independent body representing former legislators who have served the Parliament of Sri Lanka across successive administrations. The Association is committed to upholding democratic values, parliamentary traditions, institutional integrity, and the rule of law within Sri Lanka’s governance framework. It is with grave concern that we bring to your attention a series of developments that, in our respectful view, seriously undermine parliamentary democracy, administrative fairness, and institutional independence in Sri Lanka.
1. Unlawful Cancellation of Parliamentary Pensions
The present Government of Sri Lanka has, through actions that we consider both unlawful and unethical, cancelled the pension entitlements of former Members of Parliament. This decision appears to have been taken arbitrarily, without adherence to established legal principles, legitimate expectations, or due process, thereby undermining the dignity and security of those who have served in the national legislature.
2. Illegal and Malicious Interdiction of the Deputy Secretary General of Parliament
We wish to draw urgent attention to the interdiction of the Chief of Staff and Deputy Secretary General of Parliament, which raises serious concerns regarding abuse of authority and interference in administrative due process. According to material presently before the Court of Appeal of Sri Lanka (CA/Writ Application No. 109/2026), the interdiction:
• Was imposed through the Parliamentary Staff Advisory Committee (PSAC), which lacks lawful authority to exercise such disciplinary powers, rendering the action ultra vires;
• Was based on a preliminary inquiry conducted without proper legal mandate, thereby invalidating the process from its inception;
• Was not the result of an independent administrative determination, but was carried out following the direct personal intervention and influence of Speaker, Dr. Jagath Wickramaratne;
• Appears to have been driven by personal and retaliatory considerations, amounting to a malicious exercise of authority rather than a lawful disciplinary process.
Importantly, it is also noted that the Attorney General of Sri Lanka has withdrawn from appearing on behalf of the Hon. Speaker in the related proceedings, reportedly in view of serious procedural irregularities associated with the interdiction process. The Speaker has consequently retained private legal counsel. This development strongly indicates that serious legal and procedural defects exist in the interdiction process, further reinforcing concerns regarding its legality and propriety. It is therefore evident that the lawful disciplinary framework vested in the Secretary General of Parliament was bypassed, resulting in a serious violation of the principles of natural justice, institutional independence, and the rule of law.
3. Discrimination and Harassment within Parliamentary Administration
We are also deeply concerned by credible allegations of discrimination and harassment within the parliamentary administrative structure, which, in our respectful view, have arisen as a result of the interference of the present Speaker in the administrative affairs of Parliament, thereby undermining the independence of the parliamentary administration. These concerns include:
• Discriminatory conduct affecting senior officials, including the Deputy Secretary General;
• Harassment and discriminatory treatment of female staff members within Parliament;
• The resignation of one female officer due to such circumstances;
• Confirmed findings of harassment in respect of another female officer attached to the Information Technology Division, as established by a report submitted by a former High Court Judge.
These incidents indicate a disturbing pattern of administrative misconduct and a failure to ensure a safe, independent, and professional working environment within Parliament.
3. Broader Institutional Concerns
The above matters collectively raise serious concerns regarding:
• The erosion of the independence of parliamentary administration;
• Abuse of authority and concentration of power;
• Undermining of due process and established legal frameworks;
• A broader decline in adherence to democratic governance standards.
Request for Engagement
In light of the foregoing, we respectfully request that the Inter-Parliamentary Union:
1. Intervene and monitor the situation;
2. Call for reports and clarifications from the Speaker and senior parliamentary administration;
3. Facilitate independent review and observation of relevant judicial proceedings;
4. Promote accountability and restoration of institutional integrity within Parliament.
Given the IPU’s distinguished role in safeguarding parliamentary democracy and promoting good governance worldwide, we firmly believe that your timely engagement will contribute significantly to restoring institutional integrity and public confidence in Sri Lanka’s Parliament.
News
Power and Energy Minister, Ministry Secy resign over coal probe
Power and Energy Minister Kumara Jayakody and Ministry Secretary Prof. Udayanga Hemapala have resigned from their posts.According to the President’s Media Division (PMD), the two officials submitted their letters of resignation to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake this afternoon.
The resignations come in the wake of a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry appointed to probe possible unlawful activity and financial irregularities in coal procurement and power generation.
The PMD said the decision was taken to ensure that the Commission’s work proceeds without interference or perceived influence from individuals holding office.
Minister Jayakody, in his resignation letter, noted that following the appointment of the Commission, he had requested that investigations into coal imports, since 2009, be referred to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), describing it as part of the government’s anti-corruption mandate.
He added that the inquiry should be conducted independently and without bias, and said his continued presence in office could be perceived as an obstacle to the process.
Prof. Hemapala, in his resignation letter, said his decision was intended to facilitate the commencement of investigations and ensure a transparent and independent process, the PMD said.
The Special Presidential Commission was recently appointed to examine allegations of irregularities in coal imports and electricity generation over a prolonged period and to recommend corrective measures.
News
President appoints Commission to probe irregularities in coal imports from inception of Norochcholai
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake yesterday appointed a Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged irregularities in coal imports and electricity generation, amid concerns over possible financial losses to the State.
The President’s Office said the Commission would examine transactions from the inception of coal-based power generation in Sri Lanka up to April 16, 2026, focusing on operations linked to the CEB-affiliated Lanka Coal Company (Pvt) Ltd., its successors, and private suppliers.
The three-member body is chaired by Supreme Court Justice Gihan Kulatunga, with Court of Appeal Justice Adithya Patabendige and High Court Judge Sanjeewa Somaratne as members. Former Ministry Secretary P.V. Bandulasena has been appointed Secretary to the Commission.
Appointed under the Special Presidential Commissions of Inquiry Act No. 07 of 1978, as amended, the Commission has been mandated to scrutinise procurement procedures, supply chains, quality testing, and operational processes connected to coal imports and utilisation.
The Commission has been tasked with the following mandates:
• To determine whether irregularities or illegal acts occurred in the procurement process for coal imports and to assess any resulting financial loss to the government.
• To investigate whether substandard coal was imported during the relevant period and to examine the entire associated workflow, including procurement, supply, quality testing, operational, and utility processes.
• To ascertain whether electricity generation using imported coal reached the expected levels of efficiency and productivity.
• To investigate whether legal or financial irregularities or illegal acts occurred during the power generation process if substandard coal was indeed utilized.
• To examine whether there were any breaches of expressed terms or conditions in these processes and, if so, whether measures such as withholding payments or other compensatory actions were taken.
• To identify the political authorities, government officials, officers of Lanka Coal Company (Pvt) Ltd, suppliers, or their agents responsible for any such incidents and to recommend future action to be taken against them.
• To propose measures to prevent the recurrence of such alleged malpractices or illegal acts in the future and to ensure proper governance and integrity.
In addition to the above, the Commission will also report on any other alleged malpractices or illegal acts related to coal importation and electricity generation, and recommend preventive measures to address such issues.
-
News6 days agoCEB orders temporary shutdown of large rooftop solar systems
-
Features6 days agoFrom Royal College Platoon to National Cadet Corps: 145 years of discipline, leadership, and modern challenges
-
Latest News6 days agoPNS TAIMUR & ASLAT arrive in Colombo
-
Features6 days agoCIA’s hidden weapon in Iran
-
Latest News5 days agoPrasidh, Buttler set up comfortable win for Gujarat Titans
-
News3 days agoPNS TAIMUR & ASLAT set sail from Colombo
-
Features6 days agoA Fragile Ceasefire: Pakistan’s Glory and Israel’s Sabotage
-
Latest News6 days agoHeat index likely to increase up to ‘Caution level’ at some places in the Northern, North-central, North-western, Western, Sabaragamuwa, Southern and Eastern provinces and Monaragala district
