Midweek Review

US-China rivalry and the problem of ‘neutrality’ in foreign policy

Published

4 years ago

2020/11/18

By Ramindu Perera

The recent Sri Lankan visit of the former United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and events surrounding the tour have raised some important issues regarding the foreign policy orientation of Sri Lanka. Pompeo’s visit followed the much-publicized Sri Lankan tour of a high-ranking Chinese delegation led by the Director of foreign affairs of the Chinese Communist Party. During his visit, Pompeo criticized the role of China and declared their intention to see Sri Lanka subscribing to the vision of ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ – the catchphrase to the American geopolitical strategy in the region. Prior to his visit, the US foreign service bureaucracy also issued a warning; urging Sri Lanka to make ‘difficult but necessary’ choices in choosing allies.

In the context of Sri Lanka becoming a focus of attention in the increasing rivalry between the US and China, the official stance of the government has been declaring ‘neutrality’. For instance, addressing the United Nations General Assembly in September, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa introduced our foreign policy as a neutral foreign policy. The term ‘neutral’ is somewhat new to our foreign relations vocabulary. Historically, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy was referred to as a nonaligned – not neutral. Further, joining a television interview, Foreign Secretary Jayanath Colambage recently opined that Sri Lanka should shift from international political diplomacy to economic diplomacy and must redefine its criterion and policies.

Whether this reference to neutrality indicates a shift in the way Sri Lanka handles foreign relations, or whether it is only a diplomatic ruse to avoid controversy is yet to be seen. However, if one considers the literal meaning of neutrality – it has to be highlighted that there is a conceptual difference between been neutral and the historic meaning of ‘nonaligned’. This difference has important implications especially in the context where the US has unleashed an offensive in the region to contain the rise of China. To understand these implications, first it is imperative to understand the nature of the China-US conflict.

The imperial order and the rise of China

Modern world history domination where powerful western nations subordinated the rest of the world – or ‘non-civilized people’ as they were known during the colonial times. This domination – first exercised in the form of direct foreign rule – brought immense economic fortunes to the west. However, old colonial domination was challenged in the mid-20th century due to two factors. On the one hand, the western hegemony was undermined by the rise of the socialist bloc. On the other, the wave of national liberation struggles spread throughout colonial empires following the second world war threatened the very existence of the old colonial system.

Most imperialist countries responded to this challenge by granting formal political independence to their colonies – but retaining control over the world economic order and denying economic independence to the newly independent countries. This condition was known as neo-colonialism. However, the presence of the Soviet bloc at the time offered decolonized states an alternative path to develop their economies without totally depending on the west. Many countries including Sri Lanka collaborated with the Eastern bloc in order to strengthen industrialization which was seen as vital to achieve economic self-determination.

However, the fall of the Soviet bloc in late 1980s reversed this situation and established a unipolar world order. Under the new conditions, there was no other option available for third world countries other than to submit to the globalization process administered by international financial institutions backed by western superpowers. It is within this historic context that China starts advancing – which is a peculiar example in our times. The Chinese advent can be explained as an exceptional event in which the rules of globalization established by western powers on behalf of their advantage was manipulated by a developing country for its own benefit under conditions of strict state intervention. In the recent few decades, China has well established its position as a regional economic power. It has strengthened economic relations with other countries. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) commenced in 2013 is a significant step forward in this trajectory.

The idea of Chinese ‘imperialism’

One of the questions that has been raised in relation to the Chinese advent is whether China should be treated as an imperialist power – similar to western superpowers. There are many ‘theories’, claiming that China is on its way of taking over the world by luring the developing world countries into a debt trap. This is a complex issue that cannot be dealt within the limits of a short article. But two points are worth mentioning. First, whether the Chinese economic expansion will result in the making of an international politico-military superpower in the future is an open question. The outcome is contingent; there is no definite answer. The important point in the present conjuncture is the absence of such political domination. Imperialism is the process of defending ones economic and commercial interests through making political interventions in other countries. Considering the nature of relations China is having with African, Asian and Latin American countries – academic-activist Walden Bello in his book ‘China: an imperial power in the image of the west?’ (2019) argues that the absence of political intervention is a significant factor that must be accounted in defining China’s role.

This fact becomes more evident when drawing a comparison with the United States. The US is well known for its political and military interventions; how it interferes in internal affairs of other nations through its embassies and intelligence agencies, how it sustains military bases throughout the globe – even in regions that has no proximity in a territorial sense and how it engages in changing regimes in the third world that it does not approve. As Walden Bello points out, the rationale behind initiatives such as the BRI is economic rather than political. The motivation behind the BRI is finding markets to export surpluses in order to overcome the overcapacity problem China is facing that has occurred due to the decentralization of economic decision making. Will China develop an international politico-military complex in the future to secure this economic expansion? We are yet to see. Whether China is capable of doing so will be another question.

Secondly, the rise of China has seriously challenged the unipolar orientation of international relations. Thus, transforming the world order in to a multipolar one defined by pluralist engagement has become a real possibility due to China’s success. The end of unipolarity opens up a new space for smaller countries seeking an independent economic trajectory and refusing to be dependent on the west. The manner how left wing and Centre-left governments elected in South America in the recent past handled their relations with China is illustrative of this new possibility. Countries like Bolivia, Venezuela and Brazil under Lula De Silva successfully struck deals with China in order to finance their industrial and welfare schemes. These resources were of immense importance especially for countries like Venezuela and Bolivia that were under the sanctions of the United States.

This does not mean Chinese investments in foreign countries are flawless and perfect. Activists have raised issues regarding the impact Chinese investments on local environmental and labour conditions. However, instead of becoming Sino-phobic and siding with the west uncritically, what is preferable for third world countries is to use the space created by the collapse of unipolarity to their benefit – and to engage and bargain with China in a collective fashion regarding issues and lapses associated with Chinese overseas economic activities.

Imperialist aggression and neutrality

Prevailing tensions between the US and China should be correctly understood as the outcome of US aggression in the region. The aggression aims to encircle China in order to defend the decaying unipolar order that has benefited the west for decades. Therefore, this intervention is reactionary and imperialist to its core. In 2009, declaring the ‘Pivot to Asia’ initiative, the former US president Barack Obama identified Indo-Pacific as the Centre of its international security strategy. Since then, there has been a concerted offensive approach in economic, political and military fronts to contain China and to sustain US hegemony in the region. The so called ‘trade war’ launched by the Trump administration aims to damage Chinese economic activities. Meanwhile, the US has initiated discussions with Japan, India and Australia to establish a military bloc (QUAD) in the region against China. India, once a long-standing supporter of anti-imperialism has changed its allegiances by striking an alliance with the US.

In this context where western superpowers are encircling China under the guise of making Indo-Pacific a ‘free and open’ zone – what does ‘neutrality’ in foreign policy actually indicate? Historically, the term ‘nonaligned’ never implied remaining idle in the face of colonialism and imperialist aggression. Though the Nonaligned movement established in 1961 identified itself as independent of cold-war era rivalries – it always adopted a principled stance against imperialist interventions, wars and racism. Sri Lanka itself has a rich history of this tradition. For instance, when the Suez crisis erupted in 1956, the Bandaranaike government took a principled stance defending Egypt’s right to nationalize the canal. It refused to let Sri Lanka’s ports to be used by British forces invading Egypt. Sri Lanka actively participated in the formulation of the New International Economic Order (NIEO) initiative launched in 1960s that aimed to challenge neo colonial economic domination. Further, it condemned western intervention in countries like Cuba and Vietnam.

Thus, ‘nonaligned’ is never a synonym for been indolent. The problem is whether the term ‘neutral’ introduced to our foreign relations vocabulary by the new government entails the same anti-imperialist dimension that was inherent to the idea of nonalignment. What is the stance of Sri Lanka regarding the aggressive role the US is playing in the Indo-pacific region at the moment? What does it mean by shifting from international political diplomacy to economic diplomacy? Does it indicate the subordination of political principles such as anti-imperialism in exchange for economic benefits? Mr. Jayanath Colambage had further stated that in terms of security Sri Lanka follows a ‘India first’ policy. In the context India has militarily aligned with the US, what does ‘India first’ mean? Does that imply Sri Lanka – at the end of the day – would position itself in the western axis in case of a possible conflict? Though answers to these questions are not clear yet – these are issues that has to be raised by everyone who are interested in defending the historic nonaligned legacy of our foreign policy.

(The writer is an academic attached to the Department of Legal Studies, The Open University of Sri Lanka. He can be reached at raminduezln@gmail.com)

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

With somewhat muddled foreign policy where are we heading?

Published

17 hours ago

2024/10/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

U.S. and Sri Lankan Marines conduct Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (VBSS) drills during Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) exercise in 2023. CARAT Sri Lanka is the largest bilateral military exercise meant to enhance US-Sri Lanka relationship. (Pic courtesy US embassy, Colombo)

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The Sri Lanka Navy will take command of Combined Task Force (CTF) 154 from the Egyptian Navy soon. Since its establishment in May 2023, US (Capt. Oliver Herion), Jordan (Capt. Ayman Al Naimat) and Egypt (Commodore Haytham Elsayed Khalil), respectively, commanded the unit, one of the five Task Forces that operated under the purview of the US-led Combined Maritime Forces (CMF).

The whole operation is spearheaded by Bahrain headquartered US Fifth Fleet. SLN, under the previous regime led by Ranil Wickremesinghe, joined the CMF in 2023 as its 39th member. Meanwhile, strange bedfellow Argentina is the latest addition to it. To make matters worse for that country, Buenos Aires, under eccentric right wing President Javier Gerardo Milei, wants to make the US dollar its official currency..

SLN disclosed the CMF’s move in a press release dated Oct, 02 under the new JVP/NFF regime that dealt with CTF commander Commodore Haytham Elsayed Khalil of the Egyptian Navy meeting Sri Lanka Navy Commander Vice Admiral Priyantha Perera.

CTF 150 focuses on maritime security in the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean, CTF 151 leads regional counter-piracy efforts, CTF 152 handles maritime security in the Arabian Gulf, CTF 153 is responsible for operations in the Red Sea, and CTF 154 is tasked with training, thereby improving operational capabilities to enhance maritime security in the Middle East.

The CMF’s overall strategy should be examined taking into consideration the widening of the Middle East conflict, with Israel simultaneously taking on Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) in Gaza, Hezbollah (Party of God) based in Lebanon and Iran widely accused of financing Hezbollah. In the wake of further destabilization of the region as a result of Israeli ground forces entering Lebanon and Iran firing missiles at the Jewish State in retaliation for terrorist acts committed against it, inside Iran, and elsewhere, the US and the UK bombed Yemen where Iran backed Houthis are trying to disrupt ship movements in the Red Sea. Since Israel launched a war against Hamas, in Gaza, and using that as an excuse, is committing acts of genocide against the Palestinians to create a homogeneous Jewis state, Houthis have meanwhile targeted nearly 90 merchant vessels in the Red Sea to force a halt to Israeli terror tactics to drive out or kill the Palestinians. Hezbollah and other resistance groups from Yemen, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, too, are stepping up attacks to turn the tide against the extremist Jewish state.

Sri Lanka is now ironically among the coalition backing Israel battling Iran and Tehran-backed groups on multiple fronts and thousands of our workers are now employed in the Jewish state because of the extreme poverty here. Did Israel, in spite of knowing the impending Oct. 07, 2023 Hamas raid, targeting Southern Israel, conveniently turn a blind eye to pave the way for a sustained offensive? In other words, did Iran backed groups walk into an Israeli trap. The Israeli onslaught appeared to have been a meticulously planned response. The triggering of explosions in pagers used by Hezbollah, or those in some way connected to it in Lebanon and Syria, in the third week of September, before the killing of Hezbollah Chief Hassan Nasrallah, in Beirut, and the Israeli ground invasion, suggested the Jewish State planned a knockout blow against the Iran-led coalition. What Netanyahu did not bargain for is that the present day resistance is made up of committed fighters unlike the Arab armies that met Jewish state’s terror tactics in earlier wars as in 1948 and 1967. Though the Western media tries to paint Iran as the villain over the whole issue, Iran, nor its proxies, have caused needless bloodletting among Israeli civilians. Two major missile attacks that Teheran has so far carried out against the Jewish state had taken extraordinary measures not to target civilian infrastructure thereby hardly harming any noncombatants there. This is unlike Israel that has caused unimaginable harm to Arab civilians.

Outgoing US President Joe Biden’s suggestion that Israel shouldn’t hit Iranian oil or nuclear sites in response to a massive missile strike but consider other alternatives underscored the gravity of the rapidly developing situation.

Whether the world likes it or not, the war in the Middle East, as well as Ukraine, where the US and its major allies (all part of CMF) are trying to wear down Russia, is being politicized. There cannot be a better example than Republican White House hopeful Donald Trump’s declaration that he believed Israel should strike Iranian nuclear facilities in response to the recent Iranian missile barrage.

Those who had compared the decimation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in 2009 by the Sri Lanka military and the war between Hamas and Israel in the aftermath of the Oct. 07 raids, included New Delhi based Narayan Swamy, who served UNI and AFP during his decades long career. While acknowledging that no two situations were absolutely comparable, Swamy, who currently serves as the Executive Director of IANS (Indo-Asian News Service) declared: “Oct 7 could be a turning point for Hamas similar to what happened to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka in 2006. Let me explain. Similar to Hamas, the LTTE grew significantly over time eventually gaining control of a significant portion of Sri Lanka’s land and coast. The LTTE was even more formidable than Hamas. It had a strong army, growing air force and a deadly naval presence. Unlike Hamas the LTTE successfully assassinated high ranking political figures in Sri Lanka and India. Notably LTTE achieved this without direct support from any country??? Well Hamas received military and financial backing from Iran and some other states [emphasis is mine]. The LTTE became too sure of their victories overtime. They thought they could never be beaten and that starting a war would always make them stronger. But in 2006 when they began Eelam War 1V their leader Velupillai Prabhakaran couldn’t have foreseen that within three years he and his prominent group that the world was led to believe as being virtually invincible, especially by the Western media and so-called military experts, would be defeated. Prabhakaran believed gathering tens of thousands of Tamil civilians during the last stages of the war would protect them and Sri Lanka wouldn’t unleash missiles and rockets. Colombo proved him wrong. They were hit. By asking the people not to flee Gaza, despite Israeli warnings, Hamas is taking a similar line. Punishing all Palestinians for Hamas’ actions is unjust just like punishing all Tamils for LTTE’s actions was wrong. The LTTE claimed to fight for Tamils without consulting them and Hamas claimed to represent Palestinians without seeking the approval for the Oct.7 strike. Well two situations are not absolutely comparable. We can be clear that Hamas is facing a situation similar to what the LTTE faced shortly before its end. Will Hamas meet a similar fate as the LTTE? Only time will answer that question.”

In a way, the circumstances of the ongoing Middle East conflict and the emergence of Tamil terrorism here is so dissimilar, the situations cannot be compared at all.

GoSL stand on ME conflict

In the first week of January, this year, the then President, who is also the Commander-in-Chief, in addition to being the Defence Minister, Ranil Wickremeisnghe, declared his intention to deploy an SLN vessel in the Red Sea in support of the ongoing CMF operations. The specific US-led effort meant to overcome the Houthi challenge was called ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian.’ In spite of statements attributed to various spokespersons at that time, we are still in the dark as to the actual implementation of Wickremesinghe’s directive.

How could Sri Lanka undertake such a costly deployment in the absence of at least one properly equipped vessel to operate in missile and drone environments at a time the Wickremesinghe administration claimed it couldn’t hold Local Government polls for want of sufficient funds?

Why on earth Wickremeisnghe wanted a role for SLN in ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian’, launched in Dec. 2023, when some of Washington’s allies were skeptical about the initiative?

With the further deterioration of the Middle East situation, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government should take stock of the situation. Jathika Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and Jathika Jana Balawegaya (JJB) leader AKD, in his capacity as the Commander-in Chief of armed forces and Defence Minister, should receive a comprehensive briefing regarding the current situation.

In the absence of a properly constituted foreign policy, Sri Lanka found itself in a deepening quandary. The armed forces, as well as the JVP that had been at the receiving end, in 1971 and 1987-1990, of the counter-insurgency campaigns, need to work together in an environment caused by AKD’s unexpected triumph over the two-party system.

Let me examine the JVP/JJB stand on the SLN’s Read Sea deployment as desired by Wickremesinghe. It would be pertinent to mention that the SLN joined the CMF during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President.

On behalf of the JVP/JJB, Sunil Handunetti strongly condemned Wickremesinghe’s declaration on the Red Sea deployment. The former JVP parliamentarian questioned the rationality of Wickremesinghe move while warning of dire consequences. The one-time head of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE), a vital parliamentary watchdog committee, accused Wickremesinghe of joining a US-led effort supportive of Israel. Warning Sri Lanka could earn the wrath of certain countries by participating in such US-led endeavours, Handunetti asked whether President Wickremesinghe could decide on active participation in an international operation.

Against that background, President AKD and his Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath should make Sri Lanka’s position clear in respect of the Middle East conflict. Regardless of the country heading towards parliamentary elections in a couple of weeks, the President will have to keep an eye on developments as various interested parties pursue strategies which may not align with our own.

The developing situation in Lebanon, as well as Syria, compelled the Foreign Ministry to issue travel warnings in respect of both countries while keeping its options open on Israel. The second Iranian missile barrage carried out against Israel in October obviously didn’t influence Sri Lanka to issue a travel warning. Iran mounted its first bombardment in April also this year. Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic missions both in Tel Aviv and Beirut.

Developing dilemma

One can easily understand bankrupt Sri Lanka’s dilemma when India finds itself in an unenviable situation. In spite of denials at different levels, India made ammunition, explosives and other equipment that are used by Israel and Ukraine, with the latter using them against Russia, one-time major supplier of armaments to India. The late Indian Foreign Secretary J.N. Dixit, who at times behaved like a Viceroy when he was their High Commissioner in Colombo in the ’80s, in his memoirs ‘Foreign Policy Makers of India’ defended Indira Gandhi’s controversial decision not to condemn the 1979 Soviet intervention in Afghanistan due to their heavy dependence on the Soviet Union for defense needs.

New Delhi obviously cannot ignore Washington’s requirement to ensure a steady supply of ammunition to Israel and Ukraine alike.

Reuters declared on Sept. 19, 2024, following the publication of a New Delhi datelined exclusive headlined “Ammunition from India enters Ukraine, raising Russian ire,” India’s Foreign Ministry described the report as ‘speculative and misleading.’

The news agency quoted Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal as having said: “It implies violations by India where none exist and, hence, is inaccurate and mischievous.”

“India has been carrying out its defence exports taking into account its international obligations on non-proliferation and based on robust legal and regulatory framework, which includes a holistic assessment of relevant criteria, including end user obligations and certifications,” Jaiswal said.

The bottom line is that even strategic alliances are changing or done away with. India-Russia relationship, built largely on defence ties, can be cited as an example. Indian’s backing for Ukraine and Israel meant that the former’s role in the world stage has undergone a drastic change. That is the undeniable truth.

India skipped the U.N. General Assembly vote on February 23, 2023 on a resolution that underscored the need to reach as soon as possible a “comprehensive, just and lasting peace” in Ukraine in line with the principles of the U.N. Charter. India won’t condemn Russia over the war in Ukraine either. But, that wouldn’t prevent New Delhi from supplying Israel and Ukraine while Indians serving with the Russian Army battling Ukraine remains an issue. New Delhi, too, is obviously playing both sides like most of the Arab regimes when dealing with Israel and the issue of hapless Palestinians as we have explained earlier.

In the run-up to the presidential election here, the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government was accused of turning a blind eye to ex- and serving military personnel joining Russia. Although both Russia and Sri Lanka promised to address the concerns of men on the Ukrainian-Russia front, as well as their families, the current situation is not known.

The former Foreign Minister Ali Sabry, PC, intervened in this matter and ex-Defence Secretary General (retd.) Kamal Gunaratne, especially, visited Moscow to explore ways and means of reaching consensus on the issue at hand. However, the AKD administration should examine the whole issue afresh as combat experienced Sri Lankans serving with foreign forces can be a social issue.

We know Sri Lanka paid a heavy price for failing to take remedial measures after Sri Lankans reached Syria during the Yahapalana administration (2015-2019). Had the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government acted on a warning issued by its own Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, as advised by the intelligence services, the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage may have been avoided.

At that time, some speculated that 45 persons of nine families joined ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

Taking into consideration the arrest of four Sri Lankans by Gujarat police on terrorism charges during the general election in India, the new government should also pay attention to emerging threats. The arrests, last May, proved that security concerns remain. However, the All Ceylon Union of Muslim League Youth Fronts (ACUMLYF) repeatedly questioned the failure on the part of the previous administration to take up this issue with India.

In response to The Island queries, the grouping’s President Sham Nawaz said that though they had made representations in this regard to the then State Foreign Minister Tharaka Balasuriya in the first week of June, the Foreign Ministry at least didn’t bother to respond. In fact, there hadn’t been any response whatsoever until the change of the government in September. Perhaps, Nawaz should make representations to new Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath.

Another US ship

Sri Lanka will receive another mothballed US Coast Guard Cutter, gratis, courtesy the USA. Over the years, the US transferred three Coast Guard Cutters to Sri Lanka, also gratis. The transfer of the fourth US Coast Guard Cutter will take place during President Dissanayake’s tenure, perhaps mid next year and marks a significant development in bilateral relations. The US intention to transfer the vessel was announced in late February this year during Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard Verma’s visit. Verma also visited the site of the West Container Terminal (WCT), a deep-water shipping container terminal in the Port of Colombo. The WCT, is being constructed by Colombo West International Terminal (CWIT) Private Limited with $553 mn in financing from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation. But the real danger is we are being increasingly dragged into a quagmire of American making vis-à-vis the bloc led by Russia and China. As the old saying goes there is no such a thing as a free meal. Let us hope comrades who are leading us now realise it as well before it is too late.

The CWIT is a consortium consisting of India’s largest port operator, Adani Ports & SEZ Ltd., Sri Lanka’s major listed conglomerate, John Keells Holdings PLC, and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority. The consortium is set to develop the CWIT on a Build, Operate, and Transfer agreement, for a period of 35 years.

The US investment at the Colombo Port should be viewed against the backdrop of Chinese presence at the Colombo Port, in addition to China having Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease and other projects. India is keen to expand its influence here and, as a Quad member, seems to be working with others (the US, Australia and Japan) to bolster defence ties.

The expansion of China Bay, the Trinco-based No 03 maritime squadron, is a case in point. The squadron that had been moved to China Bay five years ago consists of Beech King Air B-200 and Dornier 228. A Beechcraft King Air 360ER equipped with cutting-edge technology is to be inducted to the squadron tomorrow (10) to further boost SLAF’s ability to patrol its waters and address maritime threats. The US is the donor of Beechcraft King Air 360ER.

Another maritime surveillance aircraft is expected to join the squadron before the end of this year. The donor is Australia that provided two patrol boats to SL years ago and paid for fuel for vessels engaged in anti-human smuggling operations. What we need to understand is the support received as part of the often repeated free and open Indi-Pacific strategy pursued by Quad. Valuable support received/offered for enhancement of Sri Lanka’s hydrographic capabilities from Australia and Japan should be considered accordingly.

Midweek Review

Ahambakaraka : A postscript

Published

17 hours ago

2024/10/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Ashanthi Ekanayake

Liyanage Amarakeerthi’s Ahambakaraka, received much attention when it was first published and then went on to win many accolades. The most recent among them was the Vidharshana Literary Prize for best translation in 2024. It is a novel with immense possibilities and offers multiple readings and interpretations. When it first came out, it received the attention of Captain Elmo Jayawardena, who is also a writer of some substance. He wrote a comprehensive review of the novel in The Daily News of 19 October 2016.

In his review Captain Jayawardene describes the protagonist of the novel, Bandula Balagalla, using a somewhat unfortunate turn of phrase, and twists the “born with a silver spoon in the mouth” into a different expression which will not be quoted here. It must be said that a reader’s take on what is read depends entirely on their world views, the theories of reading they encounter, and also mainly the experience they gain as readers.

As the translator of the novel under discussion of which the English title reads as The Maker of Accidents, I must say that what motivated me to translate the novel was these very same possibilities for multiple readings. The novel offered among other things a reading which aligned closely with Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of habitus, capital and power. This brief attempt is simply an opening to the immense possibilities of the novel. I will unfortunately not be able to deal with the topic adequately and do it justice but I will try my best and leave a deeper exploration for another occasion.

In many of his works Bourdieu describes these notions as that which inscribe in us a certain social status. Amarakeerthi’s novel while dealing with the socio-political upheavals which span a wide period of time also brings out these aspects of society as presented by Bourdieu.

Bandula Balagalla is an affluent man and his conduct and his aspirations, or lack thereof, create in the mind of the reader the image of someone who has everything in life and can live without being burdened by new ambitions. He can simply live a contented, if self-centered life. The novelist creates some doubt in the reader’s mind by making the reader challenge the notion of BB as the protagonist because the narrative describes him as a smug, self-satisfied person in contrast to Vijaya Wickramasinghe who in addition to all other drawbacks has to also resort to being mute for simple survival and thus be denied language and the use of it to his advantage.

Language and the “symbolic power” languages have, as discussed by Bourdieu is a primary if mostly ignored theme in this novel. Balagalla strives to create a space for language in his township as does the novelist by giving prominence of place to the different languages the characters resort to. Radha is a teacher of language and performance. For her language is performance. Language is in the Marxist sense a commodity in the novel as described by the narrator. When engaging in the translation, too, I made a conscious effort to use language suited to the different characters. Some were anglophiles, and they might not code mix or code switch easily, and they would attempt to sound more “English.” Some were more at ease with the Sri Lankan English variety. Some would use “broken English.” As a teacher of language this was partly my fascination with the novel.

Translating some Sinhala turns of phrase turned out to be a gratifying exercise because of the novelist’s natural playfulness with Sinhala and language as a whole. Just as the protagonist made up the rules of his game similarly the novelist too played with language. Rather than being obstacles, the quaint expressions and the intricate plot made me realize how correct I was to see the immense potential it offered for a “Bourdieusian” reading.

To put it simply Bandula Balagalla through his upbringing and privileged position is always at ease in any situation. This is a clear manifestation of habitus as explained by Bourdieu. He has symbolic, cultural and linguistic capital. He in fact has everything Wije does not have. Radha, who is from a more middle class upbringing and background is also somewhat “vulgar” in her aspirations in comparison. A case in point is her venture “to make ladies” of the lady-doctors of Kurunegala. Balagalla has good taste in food, music, other matters of life-style and also literature. The first narrator attempts to compete with Balagalla’s taste in literature in this sense. The ironical choice of name for the bookstore i.e. Tower of Babel is a case in point of the sense of power Balagalla wields. He has cultural, and social capital. He is well connected and he is almost native like, not simply in his use of English but also by disposition. He has the right connections as the occasion calls for. In contrast Wije with his rags to riches back story has economic power but is lacking in all other aspects. This is what he pursues and hankers after. Although he is good at “hustling” he is lacking in other ways. Here the question of class and social prestige also come into question. The Balagalla Wallauwa provides Bandula Balagalla with social standing and the right type of connections and also an inbred (in the sense of innate), or even inculcated cultural awareness which helps him navigate society. Social, cultural and symbolic capital need to be accompanied by the “economic” to help a person gain distinction. The crowns and swords that Wije seeks are but symbols of prestige which he is continuously denied. He seeks social mobility and believes that he will gain it by being in possession of these symbols which are part of what the Balagalla estate entails.

This is in fact the most thrilling aspect of the novel. One does not have to be limited to Bourdieu’s theories. However, it cannot be denied that Ahambakaraka, which means the maker of accidents or alternately the planner of coincidences is a rich novel as it offers multiple readings.

There is an interesting plot, full of twists and turns which will be gratifying for any reader. However, if one seeks to read deeper and engage with theory it does not disappoint. The three women for whom the novel is initially written are also a fascinating aspect of the story. The characters are so intricately developed and thought out that a feminist reading of the female characters also proves to be a fruitful endeavor.

My ultimate aim was to highlight these very obvious aspects of the work which were not addressed in the earlier reviews.