Opinion

Harsh realities of Non-Alignment and Foreign aid

Published

4 years ago

2021/01/30

Our leaders say we are non-aligned and certainly do their best to stay that way, though the reality may be somewhat different. We are being forced to part with whatever little we have to one or the other of the world powers, in the name of development. It seems as if we have to give something to everybody to appear to be non-aligned. To make matters worse, our economy is in dire straits and our strength to resist these almost hostile takeovers, at this moment, is not very good. Our foreign debt component is huge and we are dependent on foreign assistance, either in the form of loans or debt/equity swaps, to settle these debts and stay afloat. And this assistance comes from countries which are interested in getting hold of pieces of our “valuable real estate”.

Third world countries, whether they call themselves non-aligned or not, are heavily dependent on rich countries for development. Unless they maintain a growth rate above 5%, creation of employment opportunities and essential infrastructure development is not possible. This, for most of the poor countries, is not possible without foreign aid. In the case of Sri Lanka, which had a GDP less than 5% during the period 2015 to 2020, and has to pay about Rs.3 billion per year to service its loans, it is a gigantic task to recover; and unless a rich country comes to its aid, it may slide down further and be more vulnerable to external interference and encroachment into its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, there is nothing called a free lunch and Sri Lanka will have to carefully manage its policy on foreign aid. The often quoted epithet “beggars can’t be choosers” may not be applicable, as we may be capable of making correct choices.

One option is the IMF and the World Bank, but their aid is not without unfavourable conditions, which are designed to help the neo-liberal policies of the Western powers who seem to have those institutions under their thumb. Joseph Stiglitz, one time Chief Economist of the World Bank, had written about the ugly face of these Bretton Woods Twins (2000). Sri Lanka may not want to get too much into the IMF debt and expose its weak economy to the international market forces. Neoliberal policies include free-market policy, less government involvement, privatisation, austerity, low public expenditure, less welfarism, and commodification . These policies help the rich to accumulate wealth, while the incomes of the poor stagnate, or decline.

Then there are the big aid donors, but some of them would want their pound of flesh. These donors are in two rival camps, and are vying for “favours,” from little Sri Lanka, in return for whatever aid they may give. Surely Sri Lanka cannot afford to please everybody, like the good hearted lady who is always pregnant. If little Sri Lanka tries to please everybody, nothing will be left of the land and its natural resources for its inhabitants. Moreover, the interested parties are ganged up into two camps and are engaged in cold war rhetoric and there is no love lost among them. This would mean if one party receives favours the other party would be hurt and angry, unless they are also given something. However, one group resorts to arm twisting while the other refrains from interfering too much in our internal affairs. Shamelessly, the Western powers resort to fabricated allegations like human rights violations, to force Sri Lanka to yield on matters like MCC, ACSA, etc. They sponsor resolutions at the UNHRC in order to get a grip on Sri Lanka and force it to obey their dictate. China on the other hand, who is our major aid giver, does not resort to such unfriendly tactics; it has not forced Sri Lanka to join their Road and Belt Initiative.

We need foreign aid to get over this economic crisis which is complicated by Covid. We have to see who could give us aid with the least strings. We know that the US and Europe did not give much during the “Yahapalana” days, though the government was pro-West. In this regard it will be interesting to look at some of the research done on aid given by the US and China in the past, and the implications for the recipients.

It is often claimed that Chinese aid is “rogue aid” guided by selfish interests with the aim of entrapping the recipient country to “cough out” its assets. One cited example is the Hambantota harbour, and several such projects in Africa and Asia are also mentioned. However, Dreher and Fuchs (2015) empirically tested to what extent self interests shape Chinese aid allocation, based on the data in Chinese project aid, food aid, and medical staff and total aid money to developing countries from 1956 to 2006. The evidence suggested China’s aid allocation does not depend on the recipient’s endowment with natural resources. Therefore, it is unjustified to condemn Chinese aid as “rogue aid” . These findings are also supported by other researchers (Brautigam, 2009).

Further evidence could be found in a two-volume publication titled “China’s Foreign Aid and Investment Diplomacy” by John F Copper (2016). These research findings show that though China has geopolitical ambitions it does not interfere in the internal affairs of recipient countries. Instead it wins over countries to its side by giving aid for mutually beneficial projects, in terms of bilateral trade and soft diplomacy. In contrast, the US aid is linked to a more aggressive foreign policy and expectations of loyalty in regard to US hegemonic agendas. For instance US would expect recipients of its aid to fall in line and lend support at the UN on controversial issues favourable to the US. Sri Lanka has been at the receiving end in the recent past at the UNHRC, on account of this attitude of the US and other Western powers. A true friend like China would not have done such treachery.

The other important consideration is who would have the ability to give aid, the US and Europe has a ruined economy due to mismanagement of the Covid pandemic, which has devastated their societies in an unprecedented manner. They may not be able to give aid for a long time to come. Remember they did not give any aid to their friend the “Yahapalana” government either. Instead they did their utmost to erode our independence and sovereignty. It would be futile to expect anything from them. Japan, Australia, Scandinavia, South Korea and India, which are in the US camp may be able to help a bit, but their domestic needs would be greater on account of Covid. China, on the other hand, has recovered from the pandemic, and according to the IMF their economy has already overtaken that of the US. China has the potential to dominate the economy of the post-Covid world. China is a true friend of Sri Lanka, and may be relied upon to come to the assistance of Sri Lanka if the latter plays its cards correctly.

It may be alright for our leaders to say in public that Sri Lanka is non-aligned, but in reality, in the present context of a global power game, we are not allowed to be non-aligned. We have to be pragmatic and choose the lesser evil if we need aid in these difficult times.

N.A.de S. AMARATUNGA

All News Advertisement

Opinion

HW Cave saw Nanu Oya – Nuwara rail track as “exquisite”

Published

1 day ago

2025/03/16

Thilina Walpola

Plans to resurrect the Nanu Oya – Nuwara Eliya rail track are welcome. The magnificent views from the train have been described by H W Cave in his book The Ceylon Government Railway (1910):

‘The pass by which Nuwara Eliya is reached is one of the most exquisite things in Ceylon. In traversing its length, the line makes a further ascent of one thousand feet in six miles. The curves and windings necessary to accomplish this are the most intricate on the whole railway and frequently have a radius of only eighty feet. On the right side of the deep mountain gorge we ascend amongst the tea bushes of the Edinburgh estate, and at length emerge upon a road, which the line shares with the cart traffic for about a mile. In the depths of the defile flows the Nanuoya river, foaming amongst huge boulders of rock that have descended from the sides of the mountains, and bordered by tree ferns, innumerable and brilliant trees of the primeval forest which clothe the face of the heights. In this land of no seasons their stages of growth are denoted by the varying tints of scarlet, gold, crimson, sallow green, and most strikingly of all, a rich claret colour, the chief glory of the Keena tree’.

However, as in colonial times, the railway should be available for both tourists and locals so that splendid vista can be enjoyed by all.

Dr R P Fernando
Epsom,
UK

Opinion

LG polls, what a waste of money!

Published

4 days ago

2025/03/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

If the people of this country were asked whether they want elections to the local government, majority of them would say no! How many years have elapsed since the local councils became defunct? And did not the country function without these councils that were labelled as ‘white elephants’?

If the present government’s wish is to do the will of the people, they should reconsider having local government elections. This way the government will not only save a considerable amount of money on holding elections, but also save even a greater amount by not having to maintain these local councils, which have become a bane on the country’s economy.

One would hope that the country will be able to get rid of these local councils and revert back to the days of having competent Government Agents and a team of dedicated government officials been tasked with the responsibility of attending to the needs of the people in those areas.

M. Joseph A. Nihal Perera

Opinion

What not to do

Published

5 days ago

2025/03/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

Trump and Zelensky arguing in the White House

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!

Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.

Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.

Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.

Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera

Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.

The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!

Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.

Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!

Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!