What is the True State of US-Lanka Relations?
by Hassina Leelarathna
Ambassador Jaliya Wickremasuriya in Los Angeles to officially welcome the new Consul General, Dr. Hector Weerasinghe, was in an upbeat mood when he addressed the expatriate community at the Consulate office, September 2. It was a pleasant evening, with members of the small community all attired ‘smartly or in formal dress’ as directed in the invites, greeting each other with hugs and pecks on the cheek while the Ambassador beamed, shook hands, and was at his charming best. The unmistakable ambiance of the jingle of gold bangles, rustle of saris, and the sweet aroma of cardamoms nestling warmly in basmati rice lent that unmistakable Sri Lankan coziness.
All of which makes for a difficult transition to the question: was Ambassador Wickremasuriya overrating his own performance, underestimating the seriousness of the international ring of fire circling Sri Lanka, and prematurely allaying concerns about R2P, ICC, ICHR and other Damoclean acronyms?
He reassuringly told the crowd of about 75, that these are the ‘best of times’ in US-Sri Lanka relations and that, whatever the media might be saying, US policy towards Sri Lanka remains warm and unchanged while trade relations between the two countries are on the rebound. Sri Lanka, he said, is holding its own, no longer in that underdog position where Colombo would even stop the war from time to time in accordance with US demands. “This is the best time for Sri Lanka. Those days … during the last fifteen years fifteen years we had good relations because we said yes to USA. Now we say yes to things that Sri Lanka benefits and no to things Sri Lanka does not benefit.” [sic]
About his own achievements, he said he works closely with the American business community and has taken three teams of potential US investors to Sri Lanka. As a result, within the next two years leading companies such as Boeing, Marriott, and Caterpillar will be making ‘visible investments,’ instead of ‘invisible investments’ (such as bond purchases). He explained that while there is visible Chinese investment by way of infrastructure, such as the Galle Harbor, they are not really investments but loans. US companies were interested in the harbor project, but the contract went to the Chinese because of the low (1%) interest rate. The US, he said, continues to be the largest importer of Sri Lankan products, mostly garments, accounting for 45% of Sri Lanka’s exports.
When asked by a member in the audience why after all those meetings there’s not been even one resolution in favor of Sri Lanka, Wickremasuriya answered:
“Actually we have won. If we have not done our job we would have ended up like Libya. Do you think we could have won the war without US support?” adding that American politicians are fond of issuing statements and resolutions but they have no impact on US policy. He also believes that Sri Lanka-bashing resolutions have run out of steam with a recent resolution receiving only 20 signatures. “Resolutions cannot do anything, it’s not a law. It’s a media thing,” he said, adding, “Now the latest thing is not a single resolution will pass in the Congress or Senate. It will not happen, it has not happened.”
Another audience member chimed in saying the report issued by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee headed by Senator John Kerry (Chairman) and Senator Richard Lugar (Ranking Member) was reflective of US policy towards Sri Lanka and the result of the Ambassador’s good work. Wickremasuriya at once seized on the kudos, taking credit for sending the report’s authors, two Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers, to Sri Lanka for a first-hand assessment of the situation.
The report, issued in December 2009, struck a conciliatory tone and is considered a high point in post-war US-Lanka relations. In its introduction, Senator Kerry called Sri Lanka ‘an important partner’ and expressed hope the report would stimulate debate on the nature of US-Sri Lanka relations. Among its several recommendations, the report called on the Obama administration to adopt a broader and more robust approach to Sri Lanka, one “that appreciates new political and economic realities.”
Ambassador Jaliya Wickremasuriya in Los Angeles to officially welcome the new Consul General, Dr. Hector Weerasinghe, was in an upbeat mood when he addressed the expatriate community at the Consulate office, September 2. It was a pleasant evening, with members of the small community all attired ‘smartly or in formal dress’ as directed in the invites, greeting each other with hugs and pecks on the cheek while the Ambassador beamed, shook hands, and was at his charming best. The unmistakable ambiance of the jingle of gold bangles, rustle of saris, and the sweet aroma of cardamoms nestling warmly in basmati rice lent that unmistakable Sri Lankan coziness.
All of which makes for a difficult transition to the question: was Ambassador Wickremasuriya overrating his own performance, underestimating the seriousness of the international ring of fire circling Sri Lanka, and prematurely allaying concerns about R2P, ICC, ICHR and other Damoclean acronyms?
He reassuringly told the crowd of about 75, that these are the ‘best of times’ in US-Sri Lanka relations and that, whatever the media might be saying, US policy towards Sri Lanka remains warm and unchanged while trade relations between the two countries are on the rebound. Sri Lanka, he said, is holding its own, no longer in that underdog position where Colombo would even stop the war from time to time in accordance with US demands. “This is the best time for Sri Lanka. Those days … during the last fifteen years fifteen years we had good relations because we said yes to USA. Now we say yes to things that Sri Lanka benefits and no to things Sri Lanka does not benefit.” [sic]
About his own achievements, he said he works closely with the American business community and has taken three teams of potential US investors to Sri Lanka. As a result, within the next two years leading companies such as Boeing, Marriott, and Caterpillar will be making ‘visible investments,’ instead of ‘invisible investments’ (such as bond purchases). He explained that while there is visible Chinese investment by way of infrastructure, such as the Galle Harbor, they are not really investments but loans. US companies were interested in the harbor project, but the contract went to the Chinese because of the low (1%) interest rate. The US, he said, continues to be the largest importer of Sri Lankan products, mostly garments, accounting for 45% of Sri Lanka’s exports.
- Fact check: According to Central Bank stats, US exports to the US account for 21.1% of total exports, down from 29.1% in 2006. But the US is still Sri Lanka’s biggest trading partner.
When asked by a member in the audience why after all those meetings there’s not been even one resolution in favor of Sri Lanka, Wickremasuriya answered:
“Actually we have won. If we have not done our job we would have ended up like Libya. Do you think we could have won the war without US support?” adding that American politicians are fond of issuing statements and resolutions but they have no impact on US policy. He also believes that Sri Lanka-bashing resolutions have run out of steam with a recent resolution receiving only 20 signatures. “Resolutions cannot do anything, it’s not a law. It’s a media thing,” he said, adding, “Now the latest thing is not a single resolution will pass in the Congress or Senate. It will not happen, it has not happened.”
Another audience member chimed in saying the report issued by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee headed by Senator John Kerry (Chairman) and Senator Richard Lugar (Ranking Member) was reflective of US policy towards Sri Lanka and the result of the Ambassador’s good work. Wickremasuriya at once seized on the kudos, taking credit for sending the report’s authors, two Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers, to Sri Lanka for a first-hand assessment of the situation.
The report, issued in December 2009, struck a conciliatory tone and is considered a high point in post-war US-Lanka relations. In its introduction, Senator Kerry called Sri Lanka ‘an important partner’ and expressed hope the report would stimulate debate on the nature of US-Sri Lanka relations. Among its several recommendations, the report called on the Obama administration to adopt a broader and more robust approach to Sri Lanka, one “that appreciates new political and economic realities.”
Photo: L-R:
Dr. Alethea Gray,Honorary Consul, New Mexico, Dr. Jeremy Robert Torstveit, Honorary Consul, Arizona, and Mrs. Wickramasuriya at the Ambassador's meeting.
Pics by HL
Dr. Alethea Gray,Honorary Consul, New Mexico, Dr. Jeremy Robert Torstveit, Honorary Consul, Arizona, and Mrs. Wickramasuriya at the Ambassador's meeting.
Pics by HL
While hugely satisfying to Sri Lankans, judging by subsequent developments, the report has had no impact on Washington; mistaking its recommendations for actual ‘US policy’ is at best foolhardy. As brash, and downright troubling, is the discounting of congressional and senate resolutions merely because they lack legislative teeth. For example Senate Res. 84, which was sponsored by Senator Robert Casey (D-PA) and co-sponsored by 11 other senators and which passed unanimously on March 1 wholeheartedly endorses the Darusman Report, calls for an international investigation into ‘war crimes,’ and calls on President Obama to ‘develop a policy towards Sri Lanka that reflects U.S. interests.’ The resolution, which obviously supersedes the Kerry report, puts the whole Senate on record as aggressively seeking US and international intervention in the interests of democracy, human rights, rule of law, and ‘security interests.’ While it lacks the force of law, it must be seen for what it is: grist for the R2P mill and a foreshadowing of dark days ahead.
Ambassador Wickremasuriya has been criticized in the local media in Sri Lanka for his engagement with the expatriate community. His strategy of motivating Americans of Sri Lankan descent to reach out to their respective legislators has merit since votes and campaign contributions are about the only means to impress US politicians. But his confidence in the expat community’s commitment and clout may well be misplaced. “Here in California we have one of the strongest community organizations,” he said in reference to the role of expatriates in ‘spreading our story’ and establishing ties with lawmakers. However, we have yet to witness the emergence of an organization. The few community groups that exist focus solely on entertainment.
As for the voting strength of Sri Lankan Americans and the size of the population itself, both are being grossly exaggerated with numbers not supported by census data or voter registration statistics. In California, which has the largest concentration of Sri Lankans, when spread out over 53 congressional districts the numbers are dismal. The highly aggressive and motivated pro-LTTE Tamil diaspora, with small numbers, was successful because it was able to buy corrupt US politicians with its own and laundered Tiger funds. That’s a hard act to follow, especially when you’re thirty years late and very cash strapped.
Should the Ambassador be doing a reality check in terms of what he could expect his compatriots to deliver, the state of US-Sri Lanka relations, and his own role as the envoy of a beleaguered nation facing unprecedented external threats?
To reach the writer by email: [email protected]
Ambassador Wickremasuriya has been criticized in the local media in Sri Lanka for his engagement with the expatriate community. His strategy of motivating Americans of Sri Lankan descent to reach out to their respective legislators has merit since votes and campaign contributions are about the only means to impress US politicians. But his confidence in the expat community’s commitment and clout may well be misplaced. “Here in California we have one of the strongest community organizations,” he said in reference to the role of expatriates in ‘spreading our story’ and establishing ties with lawmakers. However, we have yet to witness the emergence of an organization. The few community groups that exist focus solely on entertainment.
As for the voting strength of Sri Lankan Americans and the size of the population itself, both are being grossly exaggerated with numbers not supported by census data or voter registration statistics. In California, which has the largest concentration of Sri Lankans, when spread out over 53 congressional districts the numbers are dismal. The highly aggressive and motivated pro-LTTE Tamil diaspora, with small numbers, was successful because it was able to buy corrupt US politicians with its own and laundered Tiger funds. That’s a hard act to follow, especially when you’re thirty years late and very cash strapped.
Should the Ambassador be doing a reality check in terms of what he could expect his compatriots to deliver, the state of US-Sri Lanka relations, and his own role as the envoy of a beleaguered nation facing unprecedented external threats?
To reach the writer by email: [email protected]