Balancing the imbalance

In the heart of Jaffna University, amidst the pulsating energy of eager students and the curious eyes of academia, Raj Rajaratnam, a figure once shadowed by controversy, stood tall. His presence in Jaffna, a city woven with narratives of resilience and hope, was not just a mere visit. It was a strategic move, laden with implications, especially with the Sri Lankan Presidential Elections looming.

Santosh Jha, High Commissioner of India to Sri Lanka & Raj Rajaratnam, Sri Lanka-born billionaire, founder of the Galleon Group

Rajaratnam, a name that once echoed through the halls of Wall Street, now resonates with a different tune. His past, marked by a conviction for insider dealing in the US, seems like a distant echo as he pivots toward the role of a benefactor for the war-torn Northern and Eastern Provinces of Sri Lanka. His conviction, leading to a prison sentence, might have been a fall from grace in the financial world, but in the realm of Sri Lankan politics, it’s a mere footnote in a larger narrative. 

The power of the Tamil community, both within Sri Lanka and across the Palk Strait in Southern India, is an undeniable force. Rajaratnam’s emphasis on the combined strength of over 70 million Tamils is not just a nod to ethnic solidarity but a calculated reminder of the significant geopolitical influence this community holds.

His choice of venue, Jaffna University, is symbolic, a beacon of Tamil culture and education, embodying the aspirations of a community striving for recognition and development. Rajaratnam’s rhetoric somewhat mirrors that of Ranil Wickremesinghe, a seasoned politician known for his astute political manoeuvres. 

Weeks before Rajaratnam’s appearance, Wickremesinghe too had graced the north for four days, acknowledged the support for the existing 13th Amendment, and urged local development initiatives. Wickremesinghe also urged the people of the north and east to fund their industries for regional economic growth.

Author is Saliya Weerakoon, Senior Corporate Executive

Rajaratnam appeared in Jaffna to provide a financial fund and open his network for regional development. Raj is a maverick. His rise and fall in the US are well documented. A business tycoon was lecturing on regional economic growth, diversity, inclusivity, and economic slavery of the Tamil people. These words are too powerful for a business leader to say before an audience of youth. Raj is building a fund to fight the middleman in the vicious economic wheel. 

Has his prison sentence made him a public leader with genuine interest, or is Raj carving out a reputation management exercise to re-emerge from all the bad press he had for years? In his words, he faced “uneven justice” in the US. When you think about it, was Raj the only one who did insider dealing in the US? Was justice evenly served in a country like the US? If Rajaratnam was small fry, Steve Cohen of SAC Capital was the shark in the hedge fund business. 

The Sri Lankan-born immigrant to the US went to jail for 11 years (served seven plus years), while Cohen paid a fine of over $ 1.8 billion under SAC and survived without any jail term. It’s naive to think that insider dealings are a monopoly of a few individuals. As Rajaratnam says, it was “uneven justice” for him. 

Many years ago, when Rajaratnam invested heavily in Sri Lanka, he was known as the money bag of the LTTE and he was no stranger to controversy, with links to not one but many political leaders in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka’s corporate circle identified him by his signatory moustache, but this time, he was unrecognisable to many with a clean-shaven face. 

Was Steve Cohen’s brain mightier than Rajaratnam’s? Or does the land of democracy, equality, and transparency also pick and choose victims, just like in Sri Lanka?  

Raj and Ranil

Rajaratnam’s visit to Jaffna followed Wickremesinghe’s visit, and the narratives they echoed were different but strategically similar. 

This parallelism raises questions – is Rajaratnam playing from Wickremesinghe’s playbook, or is he scripting his narrative in the complexity of Sri Lankan politics? As the Presidential Election draws near, Rajaratnam’s foray into social activism, leveraging his financial acumen and tumultuous past, adds a layer of intrigue to an already-complex political landscape. His actions, whether aligned with Wickremesinghe or independent, signify a critical moment in Sri Lanka’s political narrative, one where the voices from the north and east could play a decisive role. In Raj’s defence, social activism and charity were part of his DNA well before. 

Indian interest

The geopolitical chessboard of Sri Lanka, already a theatre of intense political intrigue, finds a new player moving its pawns – Santosh Jha, the newly-appointed Indian High Commissioner. Jha, an ardent follower of great Mahatma Gandhi, stepping onto Sri Lankan soil, brings with him not just the weight of India’s regional aspirations but a familiarity with the island’s nuanced political landscape. 

His swift plunge into action signals India’s keen interest in a more assertive role in its neighbour’s affairs. At the heart of Jha’s early initiatives is the rekindling of the Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA) discussions, a move that underscores India’s strategic economic ambitions in the region. Further, his engagement with Kanaka Herath, the young State Minister for Technology, over India’s support for Sri Lanka’s unique digital identity programme marks a foray into the digital diplomacy sphere.

These actions are not isolated chess moves but a broader strategy to deepen India’s influence in Sri Lanka’s socioeconomic fabric. Amidst these developments, the Ambanis, India’s corporate behemoths, make a strong pitch for investing in Sri Lanka Telecom – a move that could shift the balance of economic power in the telecommunications sector significantly in India’s favour. 

This business interest, aligned with diplomatic manoeuvres, paints a vivid picture of India’s multidimensional approach to its engagement with Sri Lanka. Into this complex geopolitical dance steps Raj Rajaratnam, whose recent emergence in Jaffna adds another layer to the unfolding drama. 

Rajaratnam’s controversial past and vast financial resources represent an individual interest and a symbol of the influential Tamil diaspora’s potential role in the region. His foray into the social scene, particularly in the Tamil-majority north, is intriguing. As Sri Lanka heads towards a pivotal Presidential Election, the Indian High Commissioner’s proactive stance, coupled with Rajaratnam’s sudden social activism, signals a period of intensified external and internal manoeuvring. The narrative deepens with the emergence of new Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) Leader Sivagnanam Shritharan’s assertive statements on the struggle of the Tamil people, self-rule, and inclusivity. 

Rajaratnam credited Tamil Nadu’s economic growth to the hands-off approach of the Union Government. He stood for Tamil people in India, Sri Lanka, and elsewhere. This is a powerful statement coming from a business leader in social activism. Even if Rajaratnam’s intentions are pure, this statement will not go well with the southern axis of Sri Lanka ahead of a Presidential Election. 

Already, Dr. Wasantha Bandara, an influential voice of the Sinhalese struggle, has re-emerged, speaking against the hunt against military leaders in the backdrop of war crimes. The stage is setting up for a Presidential Election; the playbook looks the same, the same song but with a new orchestra. While India is creating a Bollywood political blockbuster in Sri Lanka, China has taken a back step. 

China’s silence

The recent radio silence from China regarding Sri Lanka, a nation with a rich history of historical and contemporary relations, is an intriguing chapter in the evolving narrative of Asian geopolitics. This silence, especially in the context of the impending debt restructuring negotiations, is not just a pause in dialogue but a strategic contemplation by Beijing. 

China’s involvement in Sri Lanka dates back centuries, evolving from the ancient maritime Silk Road to the more recent, ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The Rubber-Rice Pact in 1952 was an early landmark in this enduring relationship, symbolising mutual benefit and goodwill. Over the past two decades, China has transformed into Sri Lanka’s strongest ally and financial benefactor, with significant investments in infrastructure projects such as the Hambantota Port and Colombo Port City. 

These investments, while often portrayed as gestures of goodwill, are strategic chess moves in China’s grand vision of the BRI. The BRI is President Xi Jinping’s flagship global infrastructure development strategy for regional connectivity and embracing a brighter shared future. Sri Lanka, with its strategic location in the Indian Ocean, is a crucial node in this initiative. The island nation is a vital link in China’s maritime silk route, offering a strategic foothold in a region where geopolitical rivalry intensifies. 

China’s interests in Sri Lanka are not purely economic; they are deeply interwoven with strategic objectives, seeking to expand influence and secure critical maritime routes. However, the emergence of India as a proactive player in Sri Lanka’s sociopolitical landscape poses a nuanced challenge to China’s ambitions. India’s recent actions, such as appointing an astute diplomat like Santosh Jha and corporate investments like the Ambani pitch for Sri Lanka Telecom, signal reasserting its influence in its backyard. Beijing sees this resurgence with a wary eye, as India’s historical and cultural ties with Sri Lanka, coupled with its geographical proximity, make it a formidable counterbalance to Chinese influence.

Sri Lanka’s Herculean task

As Sri Lanka navigates through its economic turmoil, the role of these Asian giants becomes even more critical. China’s concern over the ongoing political and economic developments in Sri Lanka, significantly ahead of significant debt restructuring negotiations, indicates its apprehension about losing ground. 

In the grand chessboard of global geopolitics, Sri Lanka emerges not merely as a player but as the board itself, where superpowers – China, India, the US, and Japan – manoeuvre their pieces. The intricate dance of diplomacy and strategic interests in this small island nation presents a fascinating, albeit daunting, spectacle. 

China and India, Asia’s two juggernauts, have long viewed Sri Lanka through the lens of their expansive strategic interests. The US and Japan add layers of complexity to this geopolitical puzzle. The US, with its strategic pivot to Asia, views Sri Lanka as a key player in maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific, countering China’s growing maritime assertiveness. 

The message from the powerful Japanese Finance Minister to Sri Lanka during his recent visit was loud and clear. Sri Lanka has to fall in line with the rules! Whose rules? The rules of the US, India, China, and Japan for Sri Lanka are full of contradictions. In the absence of Sri Lanka not being able to carve its own rules, others inevitably make rules for it – a deeply-divided Sri Lanka at the mercy of others, not by default but by choice.

Sri Lanka, in this multifaceted game, faces the Herculean task of balancing these powers. On one hand, it needs China’s financial muscle for infrastructure development and economic recovery. At the same time, on the other, it seeks to maintain strong ties with India, given its deep-rooted historical and cultural connections. The involvement of the US and Japan adds to this diplomatic tightrope walk as Sri Lanka seeks to leverage their investments and support without antagonising China. 

This balancing act is not just a diplomatic challenge but a reflection of Sri Lanka’s strategic dilemma. Navigating these complex relationships requires astute diplomatic skills and strategic foresight. The island nation must play a sophisticated game of ensuring that its sovereignty and national interests are not compromised while engaging with these global powers. One might ask, isn’t this too much for a small nation like Sri Lanka? Indeed, it is a formidable challenge. 

Sri Lanka’s situation is not just a case study in international relations but a testament to the realities faced by smaller states in a world dominated by superpowers. The question remains: can Sri Lanka successfully manage these overlapping interests without losing its strategic autonomy? The answer lies in the delicate dance of diplomacy, where each step is carefully calculated, and every move is fraught with seen and unseen implications. This ongoing narrative is not just about Sri Lanka’s survival in a sea of giants but about maintaining balance in an imbalanced world.

Dangerous ground

Amid Sri Lanka’s worst economic crisis since independence, the pain of its people cuts deep, transcending all societal divisions. This widespread suffering, resulting from years of political mismanagement and external geopolitical manoeuvres, has birthed a palpable sense of disillusionment and despair. The once-vibrant spirit of the Sri Lankan populace, known for their resilience and grit, now appears to be eclipsed by a shadow of hopelessness.

The disconnect between the Sri Lankan leadership and the agonies of its people is stark and troubling. Political leaders, meant to be the guardians of the nation’s welfare, seem entangled in a web of political and power plays, often appearing aloof from the ground realities. This chasm between the rulers and the ruled is not just a failure of policy but a failure of empathy and understanding.

This deep-seated anguish and desperation have the potential to transform into a potent force of hatred, a sentiment Sri Lanka is all too familiar with, given its history of violent conflict. Leaders leveraging this volatile mix of suffering and anger for political gain tread on dangerous ground. The consequences of such actions could be catastrophic, plunging the nation back into a vortex of violence and instability.

At this critical juncture, Sri Lanka’s leaders need to embody the teachings of Gautama Buddha, whose wisdom has long been a guiding light for the nation. The Buddha’s emphasis on compassion, understanding, and the alleviation of suffering can steer the leadership toward healing and reconciliation. The concept of ‘metta’ or loving-kindness, a fundamental Buddhist tenet, should be the cornerstone of governance, where the well-being of the people takes precedence over political agendas.

Furthermore, the Buddhist idea of ‘samma vaca’ or right speech, reminds leaders of the power of words. Inflammatory rhetoric and divisive statements can fuel the flames of discontent and hatred. Instead, leaders should use their words to unite, inspire, and restore hope among the populace.

Crucial crossroads

Sri Lanka’s leadership stands at a crucial crossroads. The path they choose will determine not only the immediate future of the nation but its very fabric. Embracing the teachings of Gautama Buddha, practising compassion, and prioritising the well-being of the people above all else could be the key to navigating Sri Lanka out of this storm of despair and into a future where peace and prosperity reign. It calls for common sense, humanity, and genuine leadership amid mounting challenges.

On 4 February 1948, the British handed the country to the rightful owners. From 1505 to 1948, the most beautiful island of its size in the world was ruled by the Portuguese, the Dutch, and the British. Today, Sri Lanka is celebrating its 76th Independence Day. It took only 76 years for Sri Lanka to destroy itself. Leaders only have to look after 22 million people. Twenty-two million people are the combined strength of Delhi and Mumbai. Sri Lanka is still the pearl of the Indian Ocean but never lived up to its potential. 

Every stakeholder in Sri Lanka needs common sense, the very thing that is lacking in all. Sri Lanka is a higher risk for everyone. The higher the risk, the higher the reward