INDO-LANKA RELATIONS: ENSURING EXPERIENCE SUPERSEDES ELECTIONS

- George I. H. Cooke

India remains a constant in the foreign policy formulation process in Sri Lanka given geographic and historic connections. Yet equally important are personalities that have dotted the political landscape over the last seven decades. The success or failure in comprehending the complexities of these personalities, have resulted in relations soaring and souring at varied periods. It has been the chemistry between the leadership of the two countries that has been instrumental in steering relations, and will continue to do so in the years ahead. As the world’s largest democracy prepares for another crucial general election in 2019 the consequent relations with neighbouring countries remains critical, given the presence and potential of India in South Asia. 

The signing of the Defence Agreement with the British on the eve of Independence, construed as one of the first foreign policy decisions of D. S. Senanayake, secured the support and strength of the British from any form of aggression that might have been exerted by Ceylon’s immediate neighbour. Senanayake’s inhibitions which were upheld by his son and successor, Dudley Senanayake and then by Sir John Kotelawala, resulted in the first eight years of independent Ceylon existing amid deep concern over the power, potential and population of India.

It wasn’t until the advent of the Bandaranaike administration in 1956 that relations entered a new era given the closeness of the leadership that had been nurtured for more than a decade. While S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike had met with Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru on several occasions, in the company of Mrs Bandaranaike, Indira Gandhi too had been a part of such interactions. S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike was confident enough to abrogate the Defence Agreement with the British owing to his not harbouring the same apprehensions of his three predecessors. The bonds of friendship between the Bandaranaikes and Nehru, continued when Mrs Bandaranaike came to power, and were further strengthened with the arrival of Mrs Gandhi into the political hierarchy, as issues pertaining to people of Indian origin and Kachchativu, to name just two matters were amicably resolved. Regular and close interactions fostered a deeper degree of trust and understanding that would augur well for both countries whenever members of the two families were at the helm.

Foreign policy formulation and implementation during the Sirimavo Bandaranaike administrations is often invoked when highlighting the balanced nature of relations, especially with countries like India and China. Yet there is failure to understand the uniqueness of relations at that time and the manner in which they had been nurtured. Connections of this nature have not been seen between the leadership of Sri Lanka and India in the ensuing decades.

In the second half of the 1960s Dudley Senanayake engaged with India to the extent that Mrs Gandhi visited Colombo in September 1967 and the visit was reciprocated by Senanayake in November 1968, while India was in the Ceylon Aid Group that was arranged by the World Bank and drew support from a large number of countries in the West. The administration of J. R. Jayewardene at its initiation in 1977 maintained a degree of momentum due to the premiership of Moraji Desai. Visiting India in October 1978, President Jayewardene noted that “I am a friend of India and its people; and admirer of its noble heritage, a follower of its greatest son…Our meetings will only help to further the understanding and cooperation that exist between us already.” Prime Minister Desai was chief guest at the 1979 Independence commemoration and the foundation stone laying ceremony for the Kotmale Dam and also addressed Parliament.

Cordiality would soon end with Desai’s resignation and the election of Indira Gandhi in December 1979. At their first meeting as leaders of their respective countries, on the sidelines of the Commonwealth Asia-Pacific Regional Conference, Jayewardene urged India to give leadership to the non-aligned world in accordance with the achievements of the late Jawaharlal Nehru. Although President Sanjiva Reddy appreciated the sentiments, Mrs Gandhi felt slighted owing to her being excluded from the compliment and the comparison with the past. Her previous tenure as Prime Minister had seen a warming of relations with Lyndon B. Johnson and improved trade connectivity, which had ended in disarray owing to attempts to become close to the Soviet Union. While the September meeting may have marred relations, it was the developments in October 1980 that sealed the faith of Sri Lanka. The expulsion from Parliament and disenfranchisement of Mrs Bandaranaike was denounced across the Palk Straits and saw the rapid deterioration of relations.

The riots and killings of July 1983 exacerbated ties with Mrs Gandhi sending Minister Narasimha Rao to Colombo, as an estimated 35, 000 Sri Lankans sought refuge in Tamil Nadu. The subsequent appointment of G. Parathasarathy and H. W. Jayewardene as special envoys of their respective leaders was to become a regular feature in diplomatic engagement in the decades ahead. Whilst Mrs Gandhi highlighted the riots at the United Nations in New York, the Tamil Nadu government was to sponsor a one million signature campaign, as information regarding training facilities began to emerge. Following the assassination of Mrs Gandhi in October 1984 and Rajiv Gandhi’s ascent to power, Jayewardene had hoped for improved relations with Minister Lalith Athulathmudali sent to meet the new Prime Minister. Whilst being disappointed at the refusal to establish joint naval patrols in the Palk Straits, Jayewardene was to speak in favour of Pakistan over Kashmir during a visit to Pakistan. During that visit he was bestowed with the Nishan-E-Pakistan, the highest award in the country.

As the year unfolded with the appointment of J. N. Dixit as High Commissioner, the five-page report on geo-political realities by Minister Gamini Dissanayake, the Thimpu Talks, and the subsequent Delhi Accord which saw the recognition of a province as a unit of devolution over a district, relations between India and Sri Lanka ambled along with India continuing to be a refuge for training, arms supply and a source of funds for the rebel movement. While P. Chidambaram and Natwar Singh took over from Romesh Bandhari who had replaced Parathasarathy earlier, the change of India’s stance to include politicians over bureaucrats spelled a fresh development.

In September 1986 when Gandhi and Jayewardene met on the sidelines of second SAARC Summit in Bangalore, the signing of an accord was discussed giving way to the infamous Indo-Lanka Accord in July 1987, a month after New Delhi found it necessary to dispatch food items to Jaffna, first by ship and thereafter owing to being turned back, by air. Both leaders survived assassination attempts, and Congressman Stephan Solarz, Chairman of the Asia-Pacific Sub-Committee in House of Representatives announced that he would nominate them for the Nobel Peace Prize for ‘setting out on the right path. They will deserve great praise if they stick to it. Mr Jayewardene will have saved his country. Mr Gandhi will have exercised powers of statesmanship and a decision that seemed to have deserted him.’

The end of the Jayewardene tenure saw him invited as Guest-of-Honour for Republic Day in India in 1988 as Sri Lanka prepared for provincial council elections and the presidential election at the end of the year which would see Ranasinghe Premadasa elected. Known for his staunch opposition to the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) in the country, President Premadasa was to declare the need for them to leave, in the ‘Battaramulla Declaration’ with a deadline of 31^st July that year, which was an ultimatum to Gandhi. Attempting to link the speedy implementation of devolution to the ‘de-induction’ of troops, Gandhi had hoped for an amicable settlement. J. N. Dixit was to write later that “We should encourage the dialogue, howsoever difficult it maybe, as a friendly neighbour interested in the stability and welfare of the people of Sri Lanka. We must resist any attempt by any of the protagonists in Sri Lankan politics to re-inveigle us into the Sri Lankan situation. Once has been more than enough.”

As the final contingent of the IPKF left Sri Lanka in March 1990, with President Jayewardene himself present to see them off, it was understood that relations had reached an abysmal level. The subsequent unprecedented visit to New Delhi by a Sri Lankan All Party Delegation that included Speaker M. H. Mohamed, Ranil Wickremesinghe, Anura Bandaranaike, Dinesh Gunewardena and M. L. A. M Hisbullah among others, was an attempt to revive relations. Further, the institutionalization of an Indo-Sri Lanka Commission in 1991 with sub-commissions on trade, cultural affairs and investment and the suggestion of an ‘Indo-Sri Lankan Friendship Treaty’ were seen as attempts being made by the Sri Lankan leadership to improve ties.

The assassination of Gandhi in May 1991 and that of Premadasa two years later saw the exit from the political spectrum of two key leaders, who had often been critical of each other. The consecutive election victories of Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga which saw her being sworn in as President also indicated an improvement in relations with her first visit to India in March 1995. Having actively supported India’s bid for a non-Permanent seat on the UN Security Council, India in turn supported Sri Lanka’s entry into the Indian Ocean Rim Initiative. Working with Narasimha Rao, Inder Kumar Gujral, Atal Behari Vajpayee and Dr Manmohan Singh, President Kumaratunga ensured the strengthening of relations irrespective of the party in power in India.

The Indian External Affairs Ministry issuing a statement during the visit in December 2005 of newly elected President Mahinda Rajapaksa observed that “Indo-Sri Lanka relations are excellent. There is good understanding and interaction at the political level; trade and investment is expanding rapidly; the institutional framework of the relationship has been strengthened further; infrastructural linkages are being augmented; and people-to-people contacts have intensified.’ The statement which could be regarded as a summary of Indo-Lanka relations during the Kumaratunga presidency were testimony to the role played chiefly by Kumaratunga and Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar.

The Mahinda Chinthana of 2005 highlighted the significance that would be accorded to India, in which it was stated that “I shall as a matter of priority, commence talks with our immediate neighbour, India and arrive at an agreement in relation to regional security and peace.” The several visits undertaken by President Rajapaksa during his tenure and interactions with Dr Manmohan Singh and thereafter with Narendra Modi, and their respective foreign ministers emphasized the significance of connectivity between the two countries. The assertion by a senior bureaucrat that Sri Lanka respects the regional and international concerns and interests of India, and adopts foreign policy accordingly was a vital message to the Indian leadership of the cooperation expected as terminology changed from being ‘friends’ to ‘relations’.

The first Rajapaksa administration worked in close consultation with the Indian regime through the appointment of troikas on either side. While Basil Rajapaksa, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa and Lalith Weeratunga represented Sri Lanka, M. K. Narayanan, Shiv Shankar Menon and Vijay Singh intervened on behalf of India, as sensitive details were discussed and issues ironed out, especially in light of the intensification of the conflict. In the second term, although relations were seen to dip as New Delhi tried to satisfy influential parties in Tamil Nadu, and restricted engagement opened up new space for China, especially in the development sphere, as well as the decision of Prime Minister Modi to skip the Commonwealth Meeting in 2013, the election of President Maithripala Sirisena saw the visit of Modi within three months in March 2015 following the State Visit of Sirisena in February that year.

Prime Minister Modi returned in May 2017 for the celebration of the International Day of Vesak while External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj undertook many visits to Colombo before and after this visit. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe was in New Delhi on his first visit overseas after the general election of August 2015, and thereafter in October 2016, and in April and November of 2017. It is through an intensification of visits, interactions and mutual understanding of those in power, that relations between the countries could be expected to flourish.

India prepares for general elections in 2019 with Prime Minister Modi keen to see a second term and Rahul Gandhi attempting to revive the position his family enjoyed at the helm of Indian leadership in the past. The outcome remains significant, as overreliance on Tamil Nadu in the formation of a government at the Centre, would not augur well for Sri Lanka. On the other hand a larger majority being secured by the winning party, and its reduced reliance on the Tamil Nadu vote base and politicians, would see a marked improvement of Indo-Lanka ties. The viewing of India through the prism of Tamil Nadu is not the most appropriate given the vastness of the country and the cordiality enjoyed with other states. Yet Tamil Nadu remains a critical factor in the Indian establishment. Elections in Sri Lanka, would also serve as a key determinant of how relations will soar or sour, although all attempts would be made to prosper the ties and refrain from antagonizing so important a neighbour. 

Irrespective of the outcome, it is prudent for foreign policy formulators and implementors to realize that India is not a country to be trifled with, if experience is to serve well.

THE SCOPE OF AIR DIPLOMACY IN STRATEGIZING SRI LANKA’S FOREIGN POLICY

- George I. H. Cooke

Sri Lanka has remained one of the most globally connected countries. Whilst expeditions were dispatched to the Roman Empire in some of the first international interactions, special envoys continued to traverse the world over the centuries. Likewise Sri Lanka attracted many traders and conquerors owing to resources and location. Numerous calls have been made to make Sri Lanka a hub in the Indian Ocean, but often islanders fail to realize that Sri Lanka was a hub of strategic importance. Traders from China, the Arab world, as well as the Portuguese, Dutch and British all found the island to be of considered importance and sought to control it to their benefit at varied periods. Making the island a hub is therefore not a new policy but one which needs to be revived.

A Foreign Policy that is strategic and effective remains the most crucial tool in the armoury of Sri Lanka’s diplomatic engagement and the means by which the island would be able to stride the global stage, maneuver international issues and overcome critical challenges in the 21^st century. Amidst fresh developments regionally and internationally, Sri Lanka is often provided with opportunities that require innovative action which at times, steers away from the traditional modes of operation to exploring new avenues for building cooperation and increasing potential. More importantly, the need to strategize Foreign Policy becomes crucial, if the country is to move from being constantly on the defensive to adopting a more proactive stance in global affairs.

Reflection on that which has been becomes highly relevant at this juncture. Whether in terms of research or policy planning, foreign policy formulation needs the utmost attention given the international ramifications of each and every step taken. Today Sri Lanka is a member, dialogue partner and observer of numerous organizations and groupings, yet the amount of leverage the country enjoys internationally, as a result of such affiliations, leaves much to be desired. For too long the island has remained static owing to developments within, but now with the conflict a near decade into history, it is time the country surges ahead, but it would only be able to do so with strategy, which it tends to lack at the most crucial of times.

Identifying national interest remains at the core of decision making. Whether in negotiations over bilateral issues, staking a claim at the United Nations or through the plethora of multilateral platforms that Sri Lanka sits at, the prospect of going in with an agenda for success, rather than merely marking attendance, needs to top the list of priorities. Security remains critical, from defence of the island from outside interference; cyber attacks; protecting the air and maritime boundaries and resources; preserving peace, law and order within the island; ensuring a healthy population; securing sufficient food; avoiding economic downturns; promoting investment while protecting the environment. All of these dimensions of security are paramount for a country going forward.

Sri Lanka possesses the ability to connect with the world by air and sea. Though identified as avenues of opportunity, the high seas and air space have also been the medium through which Sri Lanka’s sovereignty has been violated and maybe argued continues to be violated, especially in reference to the seas. Yet enhancing air connectivity remains critical to propel the nation forward. Thus of significance is the opportunity to be accrued by adopting a policy of Air Diplomacy, as an integral component of Foreign Policy. Incorporating such a dimension into Foreign Policy would provide the impetus to promote Sri Lanka’s interconnectedness primarily in the region and thereafter in key strategic locations in South East Asia, East Asia, West Asia, Central Asia, Africa and Europe.

Examining the concept of Air Diplomacy, and the means by which it could be incorporated into Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy remains crucial. Reference has been made herein to case studies in which the usage of Air Diplomacy supported the state’s ability to enhance its international interaction and accrued beneficial dividends to the state. The military component of the study examines the means by which the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) could contribute to the implementation of a policy of Air Diplomacy and study the role of academia in creating a neutral platform from which militaries would be able to engage. 

States need to go beyond the prescribed formula wherein large and powerful states use Air Power and Air Diplomacy to bolster their military might. Instead being examined herein is the potential of an island state to adopt an effective Air Diplomacy policy that would enable decision makers to strategize Foreign Policy, ensure greater connectivity and guarantee a higher degree of influence in regional and global affairs. It is argued that the building of a nexus between and among militaries would auger well, as levels of cooperation and confidence would be boosted. The contributory role of academia in the pursuit of this policy generates a triangle in which the military and academia work jointly to identify areas and mechanisms for implementation, and reach out collectively to influence foreign policy formulators.

Comprehending Air Diplomacy

In an interview in 1927, Paul Claudel, (1927) the new French Ambassador to Washington in reference to his appointment noted that “my task will be facilitated by the air and popular diplomacy admirably initiated by the American airmen, who haven’t even realized their apostolate.” Air Diplomacy was born during E. H. Carr’s ‘Twenty Years’ Crisis’, but neither Claudel nor Carr realized the manner in which air travel would revolutionize the entire spectrum of connectivity that had been hitherto known to humans.

Nearly a century later advancements in technology enhanced air travel, which contributed to the rapid pace at which nation-states became enmeshed in the concept of, and thereby gave credence to, globalization. Improved and safe travel propelled industry, commerce and changed the persona of diplomacy. The role of the diplomat was transformed. Leaders themselves engaged directly thereby forcing the diplomat into a new position of contact between states. The transformation called for the adaptation of the diplomat to the new role of strategic advisor which many countries and professionals still grapple to understand. The changing environment saw the evolution of New Diplomacy, as we identify the sphere in modern times.

The air connectivity also led to the enhancement of military contact, and it has been considered to be a highly effective form of attack or retaliation. While the First World War had seen sporadic air attacks which accounted for some 1, 400 deaths in Britain due to aerial bombardments, as opposed to the 57, 000 men who died on just the first day of battle at Somme in 1916, air attacks were not as sophisticated as they are today or have been for the past several decades. From the infamous blitzkrieg over London, to the attack on Pearl Harbour, the usage of planes to drop nuclear bombs over Nagasaki and Hiroshima, their role in the Vietnam war, and their usage in other countries including Cambodia, Indonesia and Bangladesh, and in the last two decades across the West Asia and stretching into Afghanistan and Pakistan, the consequences of the air power are viewed negatively in much of the world, given the ramifications of death and destruction it leaves in its wake.

It was in the post Second World War era with the heightening of the Cold War and emphasis on building stronger militaries and enhancing military capabilities, that air power began to supersede naval power. While in earlier centuries states attached great importance to naval power as evidenced through the building of the Chinese Navy, Spanish Armada, Royal Navy and the Japanese Imperial Navy among others, it is to air power that states turned in the twentieth century. Rapid advancements enabled faster movement, flexibility and swifter attacks, especially in relation to aerial strikes.

Conflict is not the sole aspect of air power. A century ago, as highlighted by Claudel, states were discovering the opportunities that improvements in connectivity would provide, and their Forces were exploring the potential of humanitarian operations, wherein the transportation of goods and services, assisting in rescue missions, conducting evacuations and supporting ground troops, became an integral component of air power. States thereby amass air power leading to superiority, which translates into an effective tool for diplomatic engagement.

Hitler believed that “when diplomacy ends, wars begin,” a strong view that he eventually put into practice. It is evident that diplomacy and all aspects of the sphere are used by states in the formulation and implementation of Foreign Policy. With a wider scope and deeper reach, the dividends are richer and greater. Foreign Policy today is enriched through multifaceted approaches, and states are striving to evolve with developments in a plethora of fields. Amidst these varied approaches is that of Air Diplomacy. As a thematic area, and more importantly, a policy option, the study of Air Diplomacy, its relevance and potential reveals its use today by states to enhance engagement and display military might.

Hence it is understood that Air Power has the potential to wreck havoc and generate widespread destruction through its usage in military campaigns. Yet the significance of Air Power and its connectivity to Diplomacy becomes highly relevant in an era in which although military power is used for battle, it is also used for peace keeping missions. Similarly Air Power, maybe be used for the achievement of stability, ensure security and the enhancement of relations in the international sphere.

Air Diplomacy if practiced as a concerted policy would chiefly enable the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to bolster ties with countries, particularly in the region, and also with those which similarly focus on this sphere. It would also enable the SLAF to increase connectivity with other Forces in the region, improve relations with the aforementioned strategic locations, ensure opportunities of reach into new spheres, such as regional and international search and rescue operations, and carve an identity for the Force to be recognised. It would result in Sri Lanka harnessing location and geopolitical importance to boost the economy, augment the development drive, and strategize international engagement. The island’s location has long been touted as one of its greatest assets, but its utilization to its fullest potential is yet to be realized. Similarly the geopolitical importance of the Indian Ocean, and its rising relevance in global trade and contact, could boost the aviation arena.

General de Gaulle (1960) highlighted the connection between diplomacy and the use of armed forces, wherein he identified that diplomacy had three levers: “Diplomacy expresses it, armed forces support it, and the police cover it.” Lespinois (2012) derives therefrom that “Air diplomacy could be defined as the use of air assets to support foreign policy.” This support can have manifold repercussions as it could describe a country’s aviation policy and the means by which it would strive to exhibit its technical and economic supremacy. It would also indicate that countries with greater degrees of power would be able to enforce stronger positions in Air Diplomacy. De La Rochère (1997), examining the incorporation of power into diplomacy, identifies the heavy handedness of the United States in imposing its own opinion of how public international law should be enforced in civil aviation. Similar developments occurred at international conferences, she argues, particularly the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation in 1944, and the Bermuda Agreement two years later. However this paper while examining the concept of Air Diplomacy, and the means by which it could be incorporated into Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy, focuses on the military component of Air Diplomacy.

Implementing Air Diplomacy: Role of the Military

Seventy years ago air connectivity was to play a critical role in the first crisis of the Cold War. With the Soviet decision to block access to Berlin the eruption of the Berlin Blockade from 24^th June 1948 to 11^th May 1949 Cold War tensions were to reach a heightened situation as former Allied powers sought wars to avoid confrontation. It severely tested the peace that prevailed, and enabled a blockade stricken people to survive for nearly a year, but also provided a new dimension to air power and its usage.

The United States Air Force and the British Royal Air Force flew more than 200, 000 flights into Berlin taking with them in excess of 13, 000 tonnes of food supplies on a daily basis. Creating a coalition of support for Berlin, aircrews from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa joined the effort to support the American and British forces. The success of Operation Vittles and Operation Plainfare so named by the Americans and British respectively, was evident when more good and supplies were arriving in Berlin than had been supplied earlier via the rail route.

Commemorated annually, the success of the main airlift was bolstered by other initiatives such as Operation Little Vittles, through which chocolates attached to little parachutes were dropped promoting goodwill among the German people, towards the forces that were intervening to assist them. The cooperative measures adopted by various militaries saw Western powers realize the need to remain united and support the West German government in the face of Soviet aggression. Parallel to the airlift America led efforts along with other key western nations to establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Marshall Plan began to play a decisive role in European affairs.

Two and a half decades later in 1973, when Egypt and Syria attacked Israel starting the Yom Kippur War, the United States Air Force launched Operation Nickel Grass to assist their strong ally. The surprise attack resulted in loss of key ammunition ranging from tanks to aircraft in Israel but the Americans were instantly prepared to replace the losses incurred with Kissinger assuring Israeli Ambassador Dinitz that “The President has agreed that all your aircraft and tank losses will be replaced.”

The airlifting of ammunition, including the provision of new aircrafts contributed heavily to consolidating the already strong bonds between the two countries. The intervention by the United States enabled Israel to survive the coordinated attack and restored a balance of power given the Soviet support extended to Egypt and Syria. It also came at a time when Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir was threatening to use nuclear weapons to counter the attacks from her adversaries.

Portugal’s decision to grant landing facilities in the autonomous region of Azores, when most traditional European allies refused cooperation, improved diplomatic connectivity. Connectivity originated when Portugal become the first neutral state to establish diplomatic relations with the United States following the Revolutionary War of Independence. Developments during Operation Nickel Grass also made American forces realize the need to improve staging bases overseas, which was identified as a severe deficiency.

The Operation was yet another instance in which Air Diplomacy engaged in by the United States, Israel, and with the support of Portugal, resulted in the thwarting of attempts to generate instability. Meir acknowledged the action noting that “for generations to come, all will be told of the miracle of the immense planes from the United States bringing in material that meant life for our people.” (Boyne, 1998)

When the capital of Bosnia-Herzegovina was under siege it was timely air interventions that saved lives. From July 1992 to January 1996, the UN led humanitarian operation, named Air Bridge, ensured the supply of more than 160, 000 metric tonnes of aid, including food, medicine, equipment and other supplies to Sarajevo. With twenty countries providing aircrafts and facilities, and the support of numerous international organizations, the operation was able to provide more than 85 percent of all aid reaching the capital.

At the time of the conclusion of the operation in January 1996, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Sadako Ogata observed that “for the past three-and-a-half years, the airlift has been Sarajevo’s lifeline and a constant reminder to the hundreds of thousands of brave residents of the city that they were not forgotten. Without a doubt, the airlift saved tens of thousands of people and kept the city alive through three winters of war.” (UNHCR, 1996) The concerted effort of all these countries and organisations under the leadership of the United Nations resulted in the continued supply of essential items, which saw the people of Sarajevo through a turbulent period of their history.

Whilst the United States has played a pivotal role in many airlifts in the course of the last century, Israel has displayed significant involvement in such operations as evidenced in Operation Moses, wherein 8, 000 Ethiopians were airlifted from Sudan to Israel over seven weeks from November 1984 to January 1985. Thereafter in 1991, Operation Solomon saw the airlifting of more than 14, 000 Ethiopian Jews to Israel in just 36 hours. Earlier Operation Yachin from 1961 to 1964 saw an exodus of 97, 000 Moroccan Jews by plane and ship, although Operation Ezra and Nehemiah from 1951 to 1952 had been on a larger scale with between 120, 000 and 130, 000 Iraqi Jews airlifted from Iraq in a hugely significant exodus of the Jewish community from countries in West Asia. Operation Magic Carpet between June 1949 and September 1950 resulted in the evacuation of 49, 000 Yemenite Jews to Israel and had been carried out by 380 flights by British and American transport planes.

Irrespective of the country involved, the number of tonnes of relief supplies or even the number of people that were evacuated, such airlift operations carried out for most of the second half of the last century saw heavy reliance on air connectivity. The usage of Air Diplomacy supported the state’s ability to enhance its international interaction whilst accruing beneficial dividends to the states involved.

Constructing an Innovative Air Diplomacy Policy

While the case studies cited herein refer to countries with defence budgets that even exceed $600 billion, in the case of the United States, and extensive influence as with the United States and Israel, it is possible to innovate in this arena. Sri Lanka played a monumental role in the 1950’s in the build up to the establishment of the Non-Aligned Movement and went on to chair the grouping from 1976 to 1979, chaired the Security Council and General Assembly of the United Nations, chaired the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) thrice, served as Chair-in-Office of the Commonwealth and has now been handed over the chair of Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multisectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). Opportunities abound, the usage of such openings remain the challenge the country is yet to overcome.

The adoption of an innovative Air Diplomacy policy needs to be rationalized on two levels, with two categories at each level. This could be done primarily in the bilateral sphere whereby Sri Lanka utilizes her strong bilateral connections with strategic countries in the region and beyond, and secondly at the international level, whereby Sri Lanka plays a vigorous role in redefining defence cooperation through Air Diplomacy. Both levels provide the country and the SLAF with the opportunity of branching out and generating another platform for cooperation which would augur for the state in the long run. 

The bilateral level would need to be examined in two categories. Sri Lanka purchases ammunition, equipment, aircraft, vessels etc from particular countries. These are countries of strategic importance and it is vital to develop closer relations with them. This could be in varied forms, such as structured joint sessions between the militaries, and in particular with the Air Forces of the respective countries. Adopting a similar format as the Joint Sessions between countries at the political level, the Air Force interface would lead to deeper understanding, better cooperation and stronger connectivity, especially at times of need. It could also evolve into and include the conducting of joint drills between the Air Forces, which would result in the sharing of technology and expertise.

The second category at the bilateral level would be with countries of strategic importance in the global arena. Whilst a similar model of structured sessions and joint drills maybe adopted, the second tier would give Sri Lanka the opportunity of reaching beyond the usual remit of connectivity and improve bilateral relations in the process.

Multilateral engagement forms the second level whereby the bilateral connectivity could, in time, be merged with a regional conclave of Air Force Chiefs, which is absent from SAARC at present. Whilst attempting to establish a SAARC Air Force Chief’s Conference seems too early to explore, given the current stalemate in political relations among South Asian countries, Sri Lanka could instead look at playing a catalytic role of bringing Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) countries together by proposing an Air Force Chief’s Conclave amongst the 21 member states and 7 dialogue partners. Whilst this could be examined within the framework of existing groupings, whereby Sri Lanka proposes the establishment of such fora even in groupings such as BIMSTEC and the Commonwealth, where the use of Air Diplomacy would greatly enhance security cooperation. Further engagement in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), wherein Sri Lanka is a dialogue partner at present, could see the country seeking deeper engagement, even actively campaigning for full membership, while articulating the contribution, especially in the area of counter terrorism that the country would be able to make, and gaining through collaboration with other member states and dialogue partners of the SCO.

The second category at the multilateral level would see Sri Lanka explore new areas of air connectivity through the creation of a ‘Shangri la Dialogue’ model, which could be implemented for purposes of Air Diplomacy. This platform would generate immense opportunities for the Air Chiefs of specific countries to converge each year in a bid to discuss military aviation issues, multilateral cooperation, enhance regional security as well as improve humanitarian assistance and relief efforts. The conclave would also serve as a hub for the sharing of information on suspicious air activity, response to terror threats, and measures that could be adopted to thwart such activity and threats.

Preserving and promoting National Interest: Why Air Diplomacy is essential

Whether at the bilateral or multilateral levels and within the specified categories of these two levels, the formulation of an effective Foreign Policy is at the core of national interest. The protection and promotion of national interest, while within the mandate of the state, could be implemented through innovative measures. The adoption of an Air Diplomacy policy, which would be implemented chiefly by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defence, Sri Lanka Air Force and with the involvement of academia, would see Sri Lanka gain immensely through all that has been hitherto described.

The potential of the island to adopt such an effective Air Diplomacy policy would enable decision makers to strategize Foreign Policy, ensure greater connectivity and guarantee a higher degree of influence in regional and global affairs. It is argued that the building of a nexus between and among militaries would auger well, as levels of cooperation and confidence would be boosted.

As discussed in the introduction, the chief concern of a state is its security in a multitude of areas, chief among which is defence. As stated, the usage of air space is a means by which attacks maybe staged against the country, yet of importance is the emphasis on maritime aerial patrols, given that naval resources are limited and vessels cannot be deployed at regular intervals to monitor the entirety of Sri Lanka’s maritime territory. The support that could be generated by the SLAF through the aforementioned channels would see an enhancement of aerial resources which would in turn augment the naval resources of the state.

A pivotal role would thus be played by the adoption of a policy of Air Diplomacy as a strategic foreign policy option. With the completion of seven decades since the granting of independence, Sri Lanka stands at a cross road of harnessing the opportunity of peace and racing into the future to compete with nations in the region and beyond, or of vacillating over indecision, corruption and crime. The conflict is a near decade into history. The time is ripe for challenging and critical planning, innovative and ingenious action, and most importantly succinct strategizing for the future. Air Diplomacy could play a significant role in strategizing Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy.

       

REFERENCES

Claudel P, (Euvres diplomatiques: ambassadeur aux États-Unis, 1927-1933, vol 1, ed. Luciele Gardagnati (Paris: L’Âge d’homme, 1994), 103.

de Gaulle C, Mémoires de guerre, vol 3 (Paris: Plon, 1960), p 627.

de La Rochére J D, La politique aéronautique militaire de la France Janvier 1933 – Septembre 1939 (Paris: Editions L’Harmattan, 1997).

de Lespinois J, What is Air Diplomacy? Assessed on 30 August 2018 - http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-af/2012/2012-4/eng/2012_4_05_DeLespinois.pdf

UNHCR Press Release REF/1130, 05 January 1996, Assessed on 15 September 2018 - https://www.un.org/press/en/1996/19960105.ref1130.html

Walter J. Boyne, Nickel Grass, Air Force Magazine, December 1998 Issue, Assessed on 15 September 2018 -  http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/1998/December%201998/1298nickel.aspx.

White House declassified Memorandum of Conversation dated 09th October 1973 – Assessed on 15 September 2018 - https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//NSAEBB/NSAEBB98/octwar-21b.pdf.

COMPREHENDING CHINA’S DIPLOMACY: INSIGHTS ON STRATEGIZING

- George I. H. Cooke

Strategic decision making in governance is considered the catalyst for success. When examining China and the model being created and grown, the impact of strategizing resonates in every policy that is formulated, statement that is made and action taken by the state. China completes four decades of openness in 2018 and is looking to the future in ensuring prosperity within, and promoting development not just with key allies, but across the board in order to increase opportunities, raise standards for development and drive growth in the global economy.  

 

As a country grows itself it looks to reach outside through an effective foreign policy. The formulation and implementation of such a policy requires clarity in understanding internal and external factors that influence foreign policy. Of even greater significance is the ability to understand the entire structure of the country with which relations are being established or expanded. When examining key post-independence developments in China-Sri Lanka relations from 1950 as the first Prime Minister recognized the People’s Republic of China, to the signing of the historic Rubber Rice Pact in 1952, the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1957 and all key developments, the most intrinsic aspect throughout has been the need to comprehend the other. When comprehension has been grasped in its entirety, relations have flourished, and when critical aspects have been ignored, issues arose.  

China’s international relations, connectivity and investments, though under constant scrutiny as states grapple to comprehend the process by which the Chinese mechanism operates, are the main factors that ensure the possibility of an effective foreign policy. Whilst the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) notches half a decade, the large scale planning behind the projects, have created a massive impact in pushing China up the ladder of influence in the global arena.

Comprehension of China remains the most critical factor if states are to realize a mutually beneficial relationship. From the development prospects of the ‘Two Centenary’ goals, to the five pronged approach of building socialism with Chinese characteristics, to building up a socialist economy, a socialist democracy, a socialist advanced culture, a socialist harmonious society and a socialist ecological civilization, the Chinese leadership has sought to strategize foreign policy efficiently by basing it on domestic demands and policy.

China’s four-pronged Comprehensive Strategy for implementation requires deeply integrated measures whereby emphasis is laid on the comprehensive nature of the deed. This results in improving effectiveness and efficiency but more crucially guarantees an inclusiveness of varied sectors from completing the building of a moderately prosperous society to deepening reform, advancing the rule of law and exercising strict discipline for the party in keeping with the Chinese system. Further augmentation occurs through the five major development concepts to promote innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development. This model which has been activated in China is what the country looks to export to contemporaries internationally.

Addressing the Central Committee on Foreign Affairs in 2014, President Xi Jinping called for devotion to “safeguarding China’s sovereignty, security and development interests, foster an international environment that is friendly to our peaceful development, and take advantage of this important period of strategic opportunity for China.” His call identifies crucial factors that China is keen on safeguarding and promoting. Just as Aristotle advocated the importance of ‘knowing thyself’ China has clearly done her homework before embarking internationally, and teaches a valuable lesson to all countries, especially Sri Lanka on the need to understand that which is within, and attempt thereafter to formulate policy accordingly.

Bilateral relations remain the bedrock upon which China has grown relationships, particularly with countries like Sri Lanka. The Rubber – Rice Pact though concluded more than six decades ago, is highly appreciated by China due to the significance of the deed. The failure to conclude this agreement would have jeopardized the provision of a vital import for China owing to the embargo at the time and severely affected Sri Lanka’s supply of rice. One understood the needs of the other and was able to secure a mutually beneficial arrangement. Cultivating varied degrees of relations with countries in all regions of the world, China has displayed the potential of a country to deeply engage with another irrespective of size.

In his commitment to multilateralism, Xi used the 70^th anniversary of the United Nations to call for the adoption of “a new vision of seeking positive outcomes for all, and reject the outdated mindset of zero-sum game or winner-takes-all [and] forge a global partnership at both international and regional levels, and embrace a new approach to state-to-state relations, one that features dialogue rather than confrontation, and seeks partnerships rather than alliance.” Through interactions in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-building Measures in Asia (CICA), the East-Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), as well as through the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), China is striving to give effect to what Xi called “a new model of international relations underpinned by mutually beneficial cooperation.” Recognizing a unique niche, China is not attempting to change the existing system, which has undergone much trial, but is instead looking to evolve a new one.

When strategizing for diplomacy in general and when attempting to build a sound relationship with China a thorough comprehension of several factors is required. Firstly, understanding oneself whereby countries assess their internal requirements, are aware of ramifications and enter the international arena with a clear vision of what it is they wish to contribute to and gain from the international system.

Secondly, understanding the process within China, given the energetic strategizing, in which the BRI is just one of three massive programmes that also includes the coordinated development of Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei province, and the Yangtze River economic belt.

Thirdly, realizing the potential of consolidating bilateral relations and assessing the value that China attaches to bilateral interactions as well as the significance of history through which these ties have been fostered.

Finally, recognition of the international environment, and to note that as China continues to rise and strides the world stage, she is taking partners and allies with her. Changing dynamics in global governance, which have seen a rise in nationalism, isolationism and self-centered policy formulation, have resulted in China benefiting through the adoption of innovative measures of inclusion and cooperation.

The Brussels-based academic Jonathan Holslag, opines that ‘today China’s diplomacy with Asia has morphed from a rigid state-guided scheme into an eclectic array of initiatives from many stakeholders: the state, the Party, the military, the provinces, cities, companies, (and) thinks tanks.’ The strategic manner in which China develops within, the cooperative manner through which all countries are being embraced and the pioneering means by which China aims to revolutionize global governance in the 21^st century, on the eve of the 70^th anniversary of the revolution, are collectively indicative of the progress made thus far and the goals to which she aspires.

Although Martin Jacques identifies China ‘not just as a nation-state, [but] also [as] a civilization-state,’ the insight that may be derived of the overall strategic approach of such a country requires detailed comprehension, if countries are to succeed in their interactions with China.