Introduction
1.
This assignment is focused on small state
geopolitics as experienced by Sri Lanka. Geopolitics is defined as the art of
exercising power in a global perspective. According to Manlio Graziano,
“Geopolitics is the study of the relationship between space and politics”, and
space can change in the course of time and be modified by the action of man.
The intervention of man is conditioned, limited, and determined by space and
time. Thus in geopolitics, we are studying the relationship of space, time and
human activity. Furthermore, Graziano describes that “geopolitics deals with the
combination, the relationship, and the reciprocal influences among the three
dimensions that human beings cannot circumvent: their activity in space and
time.” (Graziano 2011, Essential Geopolitics – A Handbook, p. 3)
2.
Consistent with previously used definitions,
Graziano’s definition stresses the aspect of power as a key component of
geopolitics. All states exercise power by using the space, time and human
activity of that particular state. These three factors of geopolitics allow the
powerful states to the international community.
3.
Moreover, geopolitics becomes the geographical fundamentals
behind relations between states of the international community. States are
sovereign entities, externally free from being intervened or interfered by
another states. In the realists’ viewpoint, states will try to maximize their
own national interests. Therefore, in a geopolitical angle, it is the sphere of
influence of each state on other states of the international community that
decides their international boundaries.
4.
The super powers, regional powers and small
states are all affected by this power factor. In geopolitics, the sphere of
influence determines the capacity of one state to control or dominate other
state(s). For example, the United States have defined its sphere of influence
at global levels with the intention to dominate other states of the globe. India
also has its sphere of influence within the Indian Ocean region, with the
intention to dominate other states within the region. But small states like
Bangladesh, Maldives and Sri Lanka are less likely to define their own spheres
of influence because of they lack adequate power to challenge or dominate
bigger powers like India or United States.
Role of Small State and its Definition
1.
All Small States with their very nature, share
specific concerns and common interests such as challenges caused by
environmental and economic vulnerabilities. Small states are those with weaker
power to shape regional balance of power. The three criteria – population,
extent of territory and share of global domestic product – are most frequently
used. During Plato’s time it was considered that the ideal polis, or political
community, is the small state, akin to the idyllic ‘Magnesia’ of the Laws. As
the history later on changed, the imperialism of the nineteenth century
swallowed up many small politics around the world proving that only large and
powerful entities were fit to survive. (Alan K.
Henriksona A. K, 2001, pages 49-86)
2.
For small states it is impossible to have
independent geopolitics, and they invariably have to fit into the geopolitics
defined by superpowers and regional powers, which means there is no independent
geopolitics for small states. This is only because of the degree of alliance,
dependency and vulnerability.
3.
According to Stanly D. Brunn all states have a
place in the world political map and are defined by themselves and others. The
power shifts, new democracies, the ebbs and flows of conflict are examples of
the nature of intrastate and interstate dynamics that lead to defining and
redefining state’s place in the world. So small states are defined and labeled
by the influence of the powerful states.
4.
Czechoslovak President (1990s) said, “Small
states are successful in the world politics only when they become supporters of
the interests of the great powers” (Oskar Krejčí 2005). The only way for a good
foreign policy is to intensively study one’s own interests and seek a route to
their achievement.
5.
When we take examples of the small states
surrounding Germany, they were seen as being too vital to maintain practical
autonomy because of the colonial possessions by Germany and would better served
by protection and organization within Germany.
A Short History of Sri Lankan Geopolitics
1.
Sri Lanka being a small state has been a
distinct sovereign entity for over 2000 years and is claim to have distinguished
itself in the realm of international affairs for much of that time. Sri Lanka’s
geographical location consists of three vital geopolitical dimensions. Its
contiguity to the Indian subcontinent which affected the civilization, its
equidistant position between East Asia and East Africa which over laps the
whole region, and its situation astride the sea lanes linking East and West
which makes the meeting ground of the world. The wide arc of the region thus
became an area of influence for Sri Lanka, especially in the first millennium
AC[1].
2.
“In the maritime sphere, Sri Lanka had
extensive foreign contacts which included imperial Rome, the Hellenistic
Kingdoms, the Court of Axum in the Horn of Africa, the Sassanid Kingdom in
Persia, the Byzantine Empire on the Western side and the Maritime Empire of Sri
Vijaya, China, the Kingdoms of Siam, Cambodia and Myanmar on the eastern side.”
(Ministry of External Affairs – Sri Lanka 2013)
3.
Being within a regional power’s (India) sphere
of influence, realism is not possible neither desirable or Sri Lanka has
neither enemies nor fear of annexation or invasion. As Hennayake puts it, “Enemies
of none and friends of all” (Hennayake, 2011). Sri Lanka has not benefitted from
anti-west geopolitics as the western and the regional powers ideologies had
been influencing to the whole nation either better or worst. Idealism is
possible and desirable and it has benefitted Sri Lanka in the past.
4.
Sri Lanka need to work with global interests
while pursuing its national interests and need to develop its “soft power”
geopolitics, as economically, Sri Lanka is dependent on international financial
agencies and the rich states but Sri Lanka manages its own resources – natural
or human. Sri Lanka being a geopolitically small state[2]:
a. Sri Lanka is not a dominant destination of FDI
b. Geo-culturally Sri Lanka is not a member of a “larger civilization
group”
c. Geopolitically, Sri Lanka is located within the Indian sphere of
influence
d. Sri Lanka is an integral part of Indian security strategy
e. Located strategically in the Indian Ocean
f.
Located
next to the most important international maritime shipping lane.
g. Sri Lanka is an integral part of Chinese geopolitical strategy of
“string of pearls”
5.
The geopolitical choice of Sri Lanka depends on
the following factors.
a. Be part of an anti-west camp ( SCO)- Potential enemy is the US and the West
b. Be part of Chinese geopolitical strategy for the Indian Ocean –
Potential enemy is India
c. Be an integral part of Indian Geopolitical strategy- Potential enemy is China
d. Any one of these models could make Sri Lanka geopolitically
vulnerable as supporting one state against the other (s).
e. Security of shipping lanes is the common denominator of the
geopolitical strategy of the US (west) and China
f.
Be
an active agent of Indian Ocean geopolitical security strategy. No potential enemies but friends of all.
g. This can be done without challenging national security strategy of
India.
h. Sri Lanka needs to take the pro-action and inform all the major
geopolitical players of its position.
i.
There
are no permanent friends and enemies in geopolitics.
j.
Only
national interests
k. In the past, when Sri Lankan actions became a challenge to the
western and Indian geopolitical interests, they did not hesitate to pressurize,
influence and even intervene.
l.
Likelihood
of this is happening again is real.
m. In the past, Sri Lanka has also practiced a policy of friendly
relations with all states – India, China and the US and West.
n. This has been the most beneficial to Sri Lanka with least negative
consequences.
o. The Ministry of External Affairs needs to be pro-active and assess
the options and their merits.
6.
Small states face more problems differently
than large states. In the coming up paragraphs I have identified three main
problems and how Sri Lanka has faced them as a small state.
Problem 1: The Context of National Security in Sri Lanka Before
and During the Uprising of the Terrorist Movements.
1.
For this context I am writing a literature
review based on the inaugural lecture of the MPhil/PhD Programme of the Kotelawala
Defence University[1]
by Secretary of Defence, Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa on “Sri Lanka’s National
Security Concerns”.
2.
According to the Secretary of Defence, at the
beginning of the independence of Sri Lanka there were no primary concerns for
the national security of the Government of Ceylon. As a non-aligned nation Sri
Lanka is having an excellent relationship with the outside world, especially
with the SAARC region. Because of these peaceful scenarios the attention given
to the national security and the emphasis on the country’s defence was at
minimal. He had also emphasized that the military at that time was a ceremonial
force, which was assisting the government on special occasions and functions,
and the need to enhance the military strength was not recognized as a serious
concern. What we can extract from these facts is that the military was not
prepared enough especially for an internal aggression which was so massive. The
Secretary of Defence has also described that the attempted coup d’état in 1962
further reduced the attention given to the Defence apparatus by the Government.
The government then was of the view that if Sri Lanka had a strong military it would
be a threat to democracy of the Nation. It was definitely a wrong thought as
they were comparing to some neighboring countries during this period. The
negative impact was the total funding for the Armed Forces was drastically
reduced and recruitments curtailed.
3.
Think what would happen when a military of a
sovereign state is thinned by power. In reality the sovereignty of a state or
nation is totally depend of its military existence. The stronger the military,
the powerful is the show of force or how powerful the territorial boundary of
that nation. The Secretary of Defence
further expressed in his lecture that “as a result of the weakening of the
military, Sri Lanka was not in the best position to deal with the first major
threat to its national security when it erupted in 1971”. The first
insurrection started. The investigations
conducted due to the disaster occurred to this nation had found that there had
been cutbacks to intelligence services, including the closure of the Special
Branch of the Police in 1970, and this had left the Government largely unaware
of the scale of the insurrection it was facing.
The military was overstretched and weakened. The government could not
sustain its protection and asked for help from then neighboring counties, India
and Pakistan, which they helped to protect critical infrastructure. Therefore,
the British and the Soviet helped in equipping and arming the government
military. With those assistance the insurrection was neutralized successfully
and the end state was national security became a greater concern for of the
State.
4.
Further The Secretary of Defence included that
during the 1970s, Sri Lanka have seen the greatest ever threat to its
sovereignty from the Tamil separatist group in the north and east. The conflict
had escalated especially after the riots of 1983, and in the form of terrorism,
the threat had spread not only in the north and south but the whole nation. In
turn the formation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had not only been
threatening the Sri Lankan Government, but also the neighboring states in the
Indian Ocean were at stake. As this had caused a definite national threat which
had expanded to the exterior Indian Ocean, especially India, the regional
leading power started showing a great interest to Sri Lanka. International
community had started involving in the Nation’s internal affairs. There had
been known facts that unveiled that India had being training LTTE cadres in the
bases established in India itself. As Mr. Secretary of Defence said, “It is
also important to note that several international Non Governmental
Organizations that were based in the North and East first started to cooperate
with the terrorist groups active in those areas during this period”. Later of in 1985, India facilitated talks
between the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE in Thimpu, Bhutan. The talks
collapsed due to the unrealistic demands made by the LTTE. The Secretary
expressed that if those demands were agreed then, it would have had drastic
affect on Sri Lanka’s sovereignty. Peace process broke and fighting resumed
between State forces and the terrorists. This has also have increased the
importance given to the national security by the government. With its improved
capabilities, the military, police and the intelligence was able to make more
and more progress in fighting the terrorism of the LTTE.
5.
Accordingly, “In 1987, the very successful
Vadamarachchi Operation enabled the Government to regain control of much of the
North, leaving the LTTE on the brink of defeat. At this point, India intervened
directly in the conflict by air dropping humanitarian relief supplies over
Jaffna. This led to the abandonment of the Vadamarachchi operation, and the
Indo-Lanka Accord was signed in July of that year. This led to the induction of
the Indian Peacekeeping Force (IPKF) to the North of Sri Lanka, where it got
embroiled in conflict with the LTTE. After more than two years of fighting, the
IPKF withdrew from Sri Lanka in October 1990, and fighting resumed between the
LTTE and Government Forces” (Gotabaya Rajapaksa, 2013).
6.
This unorthodox intervening of India had also
made the bilateral relationships of Sri Lanka and India vulnerable and the
national security of the smaller state, Sri Lanka is badly affected. Later on
during the 1990s and the early 2000s there had being many attempts for the
peace process of Sri Lanka, but it was not so successful and the terrorism
threats to the Indian Ocean had increased far more worse than before.
Regardless of these threats, Sri Lanka as a small state she has tremendously
strengthened its military power to fight against the LTTE. On the other hand
the LTTE also gained lots of fighting capabilities from the international
communities. Again on 2002 with the commitment of external parties it was able
to continue a peace settlement process by signing of the ceasefire agreement
with the LTTE under mediation of Noway. In a geopolitical aspect this event can
be viewed as internationalization of Sri Lankan affairs because of the
conflict.
7.
Accordingly, “A Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission
was also established, comprising members from Nordic countries, to supervise
the implementation of the Ceasefire Agreement. Despite their presence, the LTTE
continued to create instability in the country; assassinating its key opponents
including Hon. Lakshman Kadirgamar, the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, and
carrying out occasional attacks against civilians” (Mr. Gotabaya Rajapaksa,
Secretary of Defence, Sri Lanka’s National Security Concerns, 2012).
8.
Due to these in humane actions by the LTTE the
military campaign widened into the Humanitarian Operation started in 2006,
which ultimately freed Sri Lanka from terrorism. And because of the
internationalization of the Sri Lankan situation during the previous decades,
there was a great deal of foreign scrutiny on the progress of the Humanitarian
Operation.
9.
As a small state, Sri Lanka has used its
geopolitics skillfully to manage relationships with other nations. Especially
by keeping India constantly informed what was happening on ground, Sri Lankan
government had succeeded to continue the operation unimpeded towards the end of
the war in 2009. Even the war has ended the international community have taken
Sri Lanka to the next difficult problem, the alleged war crimes during the Humanitarian
Operation.
[1] Inaugural lecture, KDU <http://www.kdu.ac.lk/notices/news/213-inaugural-lecture>
2013.
Problem 2: Sri Lanka Facing the Alleged War Crimes during the
Armed Conflict.
1.
Sri Lanka is facing this problem not just
because she has completely ended an armed conflict with thousands killed on
both sides, but because she is a small State. There had never been accusations
against United States after the Iraq or Afghanistan Wars, and even Vietnam War.
When comparing the power of the bigger state as well as the so called super
power and the Sri Lanka, a tremendously smaller state in comparison, and rather
less powerful to be criticized.
2.
“A panel of experts appointed by United Nations
Secretary-General (UNSG) Ban Ki-moon to advise him on the issue of
accountability with regard to any alleged violations of international human
rights and humanitarian law during the final stages of the armed conflict found
"credible allegations" which, if proven, indicated that war crimes
and crimes against humanity were committed by the Sri Lankan military and the
Tamil Tigers. The panel has called on the UNSG to conduct an independent
international inquiry into the alleged violations of international law. The Sri
Lankan government has denied that its forces committed any war crimes and has
strongly opposed any international investigation. These credible allegations
are also accumulated by the larger states in order to show their geopolitical
status in the international community. As a small state Sri Lanka is also
trying its best to justify that there has not being any unethical violation of
human rights. International community have also said “if proven” that means
they are trying to prove that Sri Lankan military have committed war crimes.
And not to label Sri Lanka alone that have even mentioned about the Tamil
Tigers (LTTE).” (United Nations, 2013)
3.
As a small state this problem have to be
handled very smartly and it has been doing so. Corporations with the regional
super power or any other super power can be a backing used to uphold Sri
Lanka’s stance of not committing any war crimes.
Problem 3: Fiscal outlook of Sri Lanka during the Post Conflict
1.
According to World Bank, “Since 2000, the Small
States Forum (SSF) has brought together Finance Ministers and Central Bank
Governors from 50 small states to discuss the most pressing challenges they
face and share examples of success and best practices in an effort to raise the
profiles of small states issues and bring them to the attention of the
international community”.
2.
According to the World Bank, “The 2013 Small
States Forum during the World Bank's Annual Meetings focused on the challenges,
best practices, and policy actions to build resilience, address vulnerability
and ensure fiscal sustainability. Discussion touched upon potential areas of
international support, including the World Bank’s work on the Comprehensive
Debt Framework (CDF) and Debt Management Performance Assessment (DeMPA)”.
(World Bank, 2013)
3.
During the annual meeting of the World Bank
2013, Hon. Sarath Amunugama has said: “Mr. Chairman, let me now briefly
highlight recent economic developments in my own country, Sri Lanka. Our
development strategy is laid out in the “Mahinda Chintana” policy document
issued in 2010. Doubling of per capita income to US dollar 4,000 by 2016 is one
of the key goals of this strategy. While strengthening macroeconomic stability,
we have embarked on various programs to develop infrastructure, promote
investments and improve the business climate.” He also said that Sri Lanka’s
external accounts reflect improvements in 2013. He emphasized that advanced
economies need to be tackled carefully as it is possible for a serious
spillover effect of the UMP exit program, and needed to reduce uncertainties
arising from fiscal policy shifts and other vulnerabilities in the financial
sectors.
Conclusion
1.
As The Secretary of Defence mentioned that Sri
Lanka is a country enjoying the fullest benefits of peace, and harmony. Sri
Lanka is engaged in a strenuous push to accelerate the economic development and
bring prosperity to all citizens. “Three decades of conflict lost us countless
opportunities for growth: foreign and local investment suffered due to fears
about the war; tourists did not visit the country, and many of our best and
brightest went overseas to build better futures for them.” The Secretary of
Defence said. He also included “Countries such as Singapore, which were in a similar
economic position to Sri Lanka when we reached Independence in 1948, developed
at a tremendous rate during this period.” (Secretary of Defence 2013)
2.
The biggest responsibility as a small state the
government of Sri Lanka needs to ensure continued security of its sovereignty.
The more it is stable security wise, there will be economic development. The
national security of Sri Lanka needs to be addressed and discussed in the
context of Sri Lanka’s history. History of any state, especially in the category
of a weak powered small state, can again emerge and do the same damage if not
concerned seriously by every citizen of the country with shared responsibility.
All are responsible to think about the geopolitical scenario of the global
environment and play wisely in exercising the power of own space, time and
behavior of people of the state. Finally according to Hey’s (2003) argument,
small states choose to participate in multilateral organizations to attain
foreign policy goals.
References
1.
Graziano, Manlio, Essential Geopolitics: A
Handbook, first pub, [translation, Brian Knowlton], 2011
2.
Krejčí, Oskar, Geopolitics
of the Central European region : the view from Prague and Bratislava /
[translation, Martin C. Styan], page 403, 2005
3.
Ministry of External Affairs – Sri Lanka,
Foreign Policy, Historical Context <http://www.mea.gov.lk/index.php/en/foreign-policy/historical-context>
2013.
4.
Hennayake, K., Department of
Geography, University of Peradeniya, 2013.
5.
Henriksona
K, A coming ‘Magnesian’ age? Small states, the global system, and the
international community, pages 49-86, 2001.
6. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore, Small
States <http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/international_issues/small_states.html>
2012.
7.
Rajapaksa, Gotabaya RWP RSP psc, Secretary
Ministry of Defence and Urban Development, Inaugural Lecture of the National
Interest Module < http://www.kdu.ac.lk/notices/news/213-inaugural-lecture>
2013.
8.
Amunugama, Sarath, Governor of the Bank and the
Fund for Sri Lanka, International Monetary Fund, Governor's Statement No. 14, Annual
Meeting, World Bank Group
<http://www.imf.org/external/am/2013/speeches/pr14e.pdf> 11 Oct 2013.
9.
United Nations, Human Rights <http://www.un.org/en/rights/srilanka.shtml>
2013.
10.
World Bank, Small States Forum, 2013.
11.
Prof. S. K. Hennayake, Lecture notes,
Department of Geography, University of Peradeniya, 2013
12. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Singapore, Small
States <http://www.mfa.gov.sg/content/mfa/international_issues/small_states.html>
2012
13.
Hon. Sarath Amunugama, Governor of the Bank and
the Fund for Sri Lanka, International Monetary
Fund, Governor's Statement No. 14, Annual Meeting, World Bank Group <http://www.imf.org/external/am/2013/speeches/pr14e.pdf>
11 Oct 2013
