MULTIPLYING MULTILATERALISM - Strengthening Multilateral Diplomacy for strategic synergy

by George I. H. Cooke

In commemoration of the 65th anniversary of Sri Lanka’s membership in the largest multilateral forum, the United Nations, which is on 14th December 2020

Multilateralism is at the core of global governance. It has been in and through the League of Nations and its successor, the United Nations that the core of multilateralism has been reposited. The UN marks its 75^th anniversary and over the last seven and half decades, the many agencies and organisation within its system have grown, and contributed immensely to the furtherance of global goals. Yet in the century ahead, the growth and integral value of the UN is being augmented by the presence and active participation of a plethora of groupings. These are not in competition with the UN, but instead complement cooperation, which is highly favourable for countries and their peoples. Having emerged in the second half of the last century, these entities are based on geography, politics, economics, finance and other factors of connectivity, and today embody the future of diplomacy.

The formalization of multilateralism a hundred years ago yielded overwhelming results. At the completion of a milestone and commencement of another century it is opportune to widen its understanding by strategizing diplomacy and deepening the synergy of its use. The inclusion of such measures in foreign policy provides innovative avenues for nation states, ensures strength for regional groupings and guarantees an enhancement of the world of diplomacy.

The placement of emphasis on multilateralism has been realized throughout the passage of time, as a means to garner greater support, build deeper awareness and promote harmonious engagement and existence. The multitude of groupings have contributed towards the realization of a semblance of co-existence and hence the ability to avoid the outbreak of a third world war or anything even close to it. Despite such efforts and the ability to stave off the challenges, they continue to abound. From nationalism and prolific movements, to global crises and pandemics, the doubt mounts, yet opportunity is even found in such situations.

The rise of nationalism in many parts of the world calls into question the potential of multilateral engagement and the prospects for countries to collaborate and compromise. The emergence of the far right in the legislative and executive arms of states appears to threaten the process of deepening and widening multilateralism as evidenced in numerous regions. The impact of multilateralism has however been ingrained in the fabric of the state. From preferential trading agreements to beneficial investment plans, and cooperative security measures to guaranteed support in times of difficulty, neighbours are realizing the need to rely on each other. This extends to those without common borders but instead share common interests, and who explore common solutions for common problems.

The era in which countries attempted to or indeed managed their affairs alone, if ever it existed, is certainly over. It ended a long time ago. Whilst the political rhetoric may attempt to persuade the populace to embrace nationalist stances, the practical aspect of governance proves the antithesis. Nationalism has risen, it has done so in the past too, but multilateralism hasn’t declined. Its superseding nature, advantageous positioning and promising returns have collectively made multilateralism indispensable on the planet.

When confronting global crises and pandemics, as 2020 revealed, countries have had to adapt to the new norm wherein their own safety may remain within their remit of control, but the onslaught of catastrophes is well beyond their capability to control. Therein assistance received and examples utilised often originate elsewhere. It is through the assistance received, be it material or technical, that the degree and depth of changes to dynamics occur at the national level. This is applicable largely to developing countries which have relied on international assistance in coping with the pandemic but also refers to situations in which developed countries have sourced medicine, equipment, and personnel from elsewhere to mitigate the impact of the pandemic. The examples derived from similar scenarios in other countries, either in learning from measures taken or not, have served all countries as they understand the ramifications of actions or the absence of such actions, through example.

Multilateralism has made the world more aware of the need to share. By sharing countries have been able to enhance their status, and improve their well-being. Whilst those possessing the wherewithal to share gain crucial positioning on the world stage, others are beneficiaries and have their well-being improved. Yet it is not limited to this equation alone. Situations abound where countries classified to be industrially poor yet resource rich, and those perceived to be financial giants but power in terms of resources, rely on each other. This dichotomy has thus spawned a deeper sense of cooperation.

The concept of one planet and one world is reiterated through every multilateral organisation. Their membership joins with the intention of contributing and receiving. Thus the building of consensus by means of giving and receiving make countries rely on each other. Though the degree of reliance maybe contested, it is still a relationship that is constructed and expanded. Given the synergy accrued from such relationships, it is possible to further grow such bonds ensuring positive returns.

The opportunities to be derived from those relationships are determined by each country and their representatives in policy formulation and implementation. Each country while possessing inherent strengths is responsible for ensuring the best returns for their respective country. It is here that strategizing becomes critical, and negotiation becomes the conduit through which strategized diplomacy is achieved.

Strategizing Diplomacy

In the decades ahead the demands of the planet will continue to increase with growing populations. The increasing presence on the globe will not be supplemented with increasing space for existence. Contending with the existing landscape would lead to aggravated conflict over a multiplicity of wants from food and water at the individual level, transcending onto the national, and thereafter causing constant consternation at the regional and global levels. Numerous other battles have the potential to arise and their effects would severely impact the progress of states, having a direct bearing on people once more.

How concerned are individuals of such eventualities? How prepared are governments for such developments? And how equipped is the world to face and overcome such challenges? Covid-19 generated much needed dialogue on the ability of countries to face such issues. It went beyond dialogue to ensuring that countries did cope, to the best of their abilities, with the unfolding effects. Yet questions exist from Andhra Pradesh to Ankara, and Wuhan to Washington on whether adequate, timely measures were taken, and are being taken, as the pandemic is far from over. Such discourse will continue well past the pandemic as the economic effects of it are gushing through societies around the world. The lesson to be derived is that no country, state or peoples can hope to remain immune or isolated when a crisis of this magnitude strikes the planet. Neither can a country battle the effects on its own.

The most strategic of tools in the armoury of a state, to assist its peoples and engage internationally, is its diplomacy and diplomatic machinery. Whilst arms and ammunition remain relevant to an extent, and finances and economic prowess stand them in good stead often, it is only through the skillful use of diplomacy that states are able to avert further contribution to impending disasters, avoid the devastating repercussions and evade human-constructed debacles or natural ones.

Of all aspects of policy formulation within a state, foreign policy needs to be included at the very core of decision-making given its pivotal nature. As an extension of domestic policy, it is foreign policy that enables a government to reach out, engage, consolidate and strengthen the goodwill a country enjoys on the world stage. Such goodwill is mandatory for co-existence as countries, though sovereign entities operate in collaboration with others and not in a vacuum. The promotion of this goodwill postulates well, especially at times of crisis and certainly in the growth of a country.

The conduit for garnering this goodwill is diplomacy, and more assuredly strategized diplomacy.  From the most powerful of states to tiny islands, or landlocked countries to economic powerhouses, the common denominator remains diplomacy. Whilst size and power matter to an extent, it is instead the quality of diplomacy, tenacity of diplomats and direction of policy that results in countries playing significant roles on the world stage. The resources at their disposal would understandably have an impact on their role but individuals with potential make the true difference.

St Lucia, an island in the Caribbean with a population of less than 200, 000 recruited Vera El Khoury Lacoeuilhe in 2001 to serve as deputy permanent delegate to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO). Possessing acumen and expertise she was instrumental in making Saint Lucia a country of great significance at this UN agency headquartered in Paris. From chairing several inter-governmental committees including the World Heritage Committee and the Independent External Evaluation Ad Hoc Working group, to heading the drafting group of the International Convention against Doping in Sport, the representative of Saint Lucia gave that country a place at the table. Serving in that position till 2016, the institutional memory and experience she gained, made her a pillar of the organisation and one to whom many other diplomats would turn to for advice and guidance. This accrued goodwill for the country she represented.

Saint Lucia’s choice of an individual resulted in the country gaining immense goodwill and the positioning of the country in a crucial arm of the UN system. Irrespective of the prospects of that country or its position on the global power ladder, Saint Lucia wasn’t subsumed within the greater machinations of a large organisation like UNESCO. Instead the choice of an individual to lead its cause made the difference and ensured effective engagement and the building of a positive image.

Positive Image

Countries are concerned about image. The desire to project a positive image is at the heart of diplomacy. Strategizing diplomacy to project that positive image becomes its very raison d'être. It is only through concerted diplomatic action and engagement that projections, alteration of perceptions, or even interaction can hope to be established. Diplomacy rests at the very heart of international relations. Possessing a systemic approach through the institutionalization of the field for centuries, diplomacy is at the vanguard of international issues. Being the peaceful and preferred option, its multifaceted construct, makes diplomacy in all its forms and manifestations the pivot of progress in the world.

Often countries struggle with three main causes for concern - reality, perceptions and resources. In conducting diplomacy, countries have to be mindful of understanding the reality themselves.  It is only when one comprehends the ground reality and is able to communicate its circumstances effectively is the challenge overcome. Similarly with perceptions, attempting to change them instantly is redundant given that perceptions are built up over a concerted period of time and will only be demolished over a similar period.

It is however mandatory that steps are taken through the diplomatic apparatus to deconstruct such perceptions, irrespective of the time involved, through repeated clarifications. Going further countries are called upon to be proactive rather than predominantly reactive. Waiting to respond to others narratives complicates messages and it is always better to commence the process rather than merely contribute to it.

In terms of resources a continuous increase and improvement of resources is essential for a comprehensive undertaking in diplomacy. Countries need to ensure that resources, in whatever form from individuals, infrastructure, and infusions of finance are devoted to the foreign policy sector. Budgets have to prioritize this sector as it is the most crucial in international engagement and will determine the success of numerous other sectors within the country, which rely on the outside world.

Irrespective of whether it is in understanding reality, clarifying perceptions or devoting more resources, it is the usage of personality that matters to the greatest degree. As evidenced with Saint Lucia, the choice of individuals ensures the success of strategized diplomacy or its dismal failure. While that which is formulated might be the most suitable, and timely action plans could be drawn up in strategizing diplomacy of a given country, it is the human resources involved in implementing it that play a most crucial role and cannot be compromised at any cost.

Generating growth

Through multilateral fora states are afforded the unique platform of being able to reach out to a diversity of countries, with which bilateral connectivity may not be strong. This arena gives policy formulators the ability to strategize in a manner which would accrue greater dividends and provide better visibility in their interactions.

The appointment of ambassadors singularly to regional headquarters that are located in many capitals increases momentum of interaction, helps a country realize its potential and more importantly guarantees visibility in that grouping. This visibility can transcend into tangible returns as the presence of an envoy on the ground has been proven to be far more valuable owing to the ability to network, rather than to have distant contact with a grouping.

Of those organisations in which states are categorized as Dialogue Partners or Observers it is essential that special attention is devoted if that state intends increasing its involvement and/or membership in the long term. Irrespective of the status of membership in such multilateral fora of significance is the seat at the table, and inclusion in the dialogue.

Countries that didn’t have direct connection with the British Empire, nor were colonized by Britain have gained membership in the Commonwealth. The rational is the ability to gain that much more by being a part of it, than being apart from it. Rwanda is one such country and will be hosting the next Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) once the pandemic recedes. The country is keen to be endorsed as an international conference destination and to change the perception that existed owing to its troublesome past. The opportunity to serve as the next Chair-in-Office will give Rwanda recognition within the Commonwealth and thereby attract tangible benefits, especially through the Commonwealth Business Forum which is set to take place on the sidelines of the summit.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) has six Dialogue Partners of which Turkey drives the energy discourse within the grouping. Turkey is not a full member but has been instrumental in this sector since 2017 and has the opportunity of increasing momentum towards full membership. The contribution is being viewed in positive light from a political perspective, is bolstering energy cooperation and is aiding the country in its efforts to become an energy hub.     

The African Union (AU) in partnering with the United Nations through the Joint Task on Peace and Security has become the key to the success of peacekeeping operations. From the Central African Republic, to the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea-Bissau, South Sudan and the Horn of Africa, contention remains a critical factor yet the collaborative nature of work has seen a decrease in tension. Ethiopia has faced internal political issues but as host of the AU, member states have rallied around the country. From an Ethiopian perspective the steps taken by Haile Selassie in forming the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1963 is seeing affirmative action today.

The Association for South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) at its inception in 1967 was deemed a grouping that would fail given the internal issues that the five founding members were facing as well as the animosity amongst these countries. Yet collective action facilitated change. The change has resulted in ASEAN being regarded today as one of the most progressive regional groupings and its members have gained immensely from the stability it brought to the sub-region, and from the peace that followed. Identified as the ‘Balkans of the East’ owing to the diversity and friction, the member states were able to alter such differences to their advantage through cogent policy formulation individually and collectively, and generate growth.  

Diversifying approaches

Through multilateral fora, states are at liberty to evolve innovative means of engaging in the world of diplomacy, though particular parameters do exist, to enable the sphere to be globally accepted. The freedom afforded countries makes it possible for them to adopt unique approaches. The diversification of the field and inclusion of new actors makes it more competitive and deserves attention in its totality if countries are going to remain relevant on the global stage.

Whilst culinary diplomacy is relatively new as a concept the deed has existed for a considerable period of time. The showcasing of gastronomic delights, through food exhibitions, not only introduces nationals of other countries to one’s own cuisine but more importantly generates a platform to present culture. Cultural exchanges or cultural diplomacy augments mainstream diplomacy as a soft power tool. Ranging from movies to music, and dance to drama, that which can be highlighted through cultural diplomacy remains limitless. Such forms extend to Public Diplomacy to reach people, and to further areas such as Military Diplomacy, and its varied off shoots, including Gunboat Diplomacy, Air Diplomacy, Maritime Diplomacy, as well as Religious Diplomacy, and its variant forms of usage notably Buddhist Diplomacy and Islamic Diplomacy in particular.

Similarly with more political forms of diplomatic engagement such as Shuttle Diplomacy complimenting the main diplomatic channels, branches dealing with science, sports, energy and economics all form deeply ingrained areas of diplomatic connectivity. Using these models in multilateral fora or basing multilateralism on such formats enables member states to explore hitherto tapped spheres and diversify their approach to diplomacy.

The characterization of diplomacy, with pioneering and widening scope of each and every sub-sect that exist to-date has given diplomacy opportunity as never experienced before. Through multilateral bodies states have the ability to promote themselves, support regional groupings they belong to, engage as widely as they wish by sharing best practices, undertake mutually beneficial arrangements, bolster existing cooperative mechanisms and establish new ones.

Multiplying multilateralism through strategized diplomacy ensures a synergic effect that will guarantee rich dividends for groupings and states alike, and most importantly ensure the prevalence of stability. States and their leaders have the option of either remaining static and volatile or synergized and stable. Though the effect of synergy remains elusive, at least from an International Relations perspective its effect when applied through multilateralism becomes more apparent and weighs heavily towards the effectiveness of the sphere.

In 2020, we mark the centenary of multilateralism. Stakeholders owe it to the founders of multilateralism to strengthen, strategize and synergize the scope of the field. With deeper engagement and wider collaboration, states will be able to reap a bountiful harvest, which would stand them in good stead in the years and decades ahead.

The time for action is here and now.

SIRIMAVO BANDARANAIKE’S TRAILBLAZING FOREIGN POLICY

 Reflections on the 60^th anniversary of the election of the world’s first woman Prime Minister

by George I. H. Cooke

History is replete with women who led their countries in varied capacities, either as royalty or revolutionaries. Yet it wasn’t until July 1960, that the democratic process saw the election of the world’s first woman Prime Minister to lead a country which had gained independence a little over a decade before. Ceylon shone internationally as Sirimavo Ratwatte Dias Bandaranaike took the oath of office, as a country and Prime Minister challenged the conventional norm at a time when women were not at the helm of political parties or governments. It was a progressive step given its origin in the East, in a developing country.

The foreign policy of Sirimavo Bandaranaike has been closely connected with that of her husband, but close examination of her tenure, indicates that she, in her own right, was instrumental in securing an advantageous position for the country she led, in the international community. Her foreign policy, and the manner in which she advocated, formulated and implemented it, deserves due reflection at this landmark juncture, as Sri Lanka prepares for another General Election.

Debate prevails over decisions made during her tenure in the 1960s and once again in the 1970s. During these periods she retained powers of governance in her office as Prime Minister which was not so during her third term from 1994 to 2000 as an Executive Presidency had been introduced. The foreign policy decisions that were made resulted in several unique developments that aided the country in several arenas, while some decisions are construed to have been detrimental.

Irrespective of the nature of the debate and its diversity, the prevalence of it is indicative that initiatives were taken, policies formulated, processes of implementation used, and results reaped during her years in office. As a Sri Lankan she broke gender barriers, overcame challenging national situations, advocated non-alignment and implemented it, and left an indelible mark in history.

Of equal importance is the manner in which she formulated policy, the key individuals around her assisting in that process, the mechanisms she used to implement such policies as well as the countries and organisations that she worked with as Prime Minister. In retrospect, it was her personality, policy and the people she worked with which could be collectively identified as astute factors that augured well for Sri Lanka.

Through the Non-Aligned Movement, the Commonwealth and United Nations, she was influential in the multilateral arena. Her actions in mediating between India and China led to the reduction in hostilities. The term ‘shuttle diplomacy’ although not coined in the early 1960s, would best describe what she engaged in, as a relatively new player on the world stage. 

In her bilateral relations, she maintained the friendliest relations with India, while also working extremely closely with China and Pakistan. Despite her stance in the Cold War, she corresponded regularly with US Presidents concerning international issues and took the lead in soliciting their support. Equally determined to continue good relations with the Soviet Union, she even undertook a state visit to Moscow and several other countries east of the divide. Having made lifelong friends among the leaders across the world, from Canada, to Egypt, and Iraq to Yugoslavia, to name just a few, the personal friendship she exercised with statesmen and women, would stand Sri Lanka in good stead at critical times.

It is prudent on this anniversary to reflect upon key developments, numerous though they may be, of a leader, who strode the world stage with aplomb and ensured that the island of Sri Lanka was internationally recognised once again.

Leadership at a young age

At different stages of her life she had been exposed to leadership, and 1960 wasn’t the first occasion that she had been called upon to lead. Growing up she was the eldest child of Barnes Ratwatte Dissawa, who was the Rate Mahaththaya and hence actively involved in governance, while her mother, Rosalind Mahawalatenna Kumarihamy was a renowned ayurvedic physician. This meant that the young girl took on a position of leadership among her siblings at a very young age as both parents served the community at large.

A Girl Guide during her schooling career, she subsequently married Solomon West Ridgeway Dias Bandaranaike who was the Minister of Health and Local Government in 1940, and actively involved herself in social service, especially though the Lanka Mahila Samithi. She witnessed power, politics and personalities from a ringside seat for the next two decades, as her husband held many different positions. As Mr Bandaranaike progressed from being a Minister, to Opposition Leader and finally to the exalted position of Prime Minister, it was Sirimavo Bandaranaike who remained at his side and as witnessed the triumphs and travails of leadership and power.

It was his assassination in 1959, and the months thereafter that resulted in her entry into active politics and finally saw her being called upon to be sworn in as Prime Minister, as the party she led, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, won the general election in July 1960. She brought stability to the office, as the preceding months had seen two other Prime Ministers holding office for brief periods following the assassination.

The Non Aligned Movement

Coming to the helm of a country when the Cold War was raging, the new Prime Minister was determined to ensure that Ceylon was not drawn into the rapacious race which had divided the global community. Whilst Ceylon had been associated with the concept of non-alignment from before independence, and Sir John Kotelawala had convened the Colombo Conference in 1954, and started the journey to Bandung the next year, it took until September 1961, for the Non Aligned Movement to be formally launched.

Sirimavo Bandaranaike played a role which made her renowned in the Movement, leading the national delegation to the first five Summits, in 1961, 1964, 1970, 1973, and in 1976 when she hosted the leaders of the Non-Aligned world at their fifth Summit in Colombo.

Addressing the first Non Aligned Movement Summit in Belgrade in Yugoslavia, Mrs Bandaranaike expressed her happiness “to attend this great conference not only as a representative of my country but also as a woman and a mother who can understand the thoughts and feelings of those millions of women.” An issue that she championed on consecutive occasions was the need to secure zones free of nuclear weapons. In 1961, she cautioned that “our endeavour should be to influence world opinion to such an extent that governments, however powerful, cannot regard warfare as an alternative to negotiation.”

Similarly at the second Summit in Cairo in Egypt she stressed that “the idea of non-alignment arose out of our determination to be free of involvement with power blocs. With the changes that have occurred in the relations between the great powers…it is true that the definition and function of non-alignment needs re-examination.” As a result of her initiative, the Cairo Conference adopted two resolutions, which called for the establishment of zones free of nuclear weapons covering the oceans of the world, and a total condemnation of the big powers’ efforts to establish and maintain bases in the Indian Ocean. The Cairo Declaration was thereafter endorsed as a cornerstone of Ceylon’s foreign policy.

In the second half of the 1960s when she was in the opposition, there was no NAM Summit, and upon her re-election in 1970, she led the Ceylon delegation once again to Lusaka in Zambia for the third session of the grouping. Highlighting that caution alone doesn’t result in sound policies, she noted that “the small developing countries like mine which seek to follow a non-aligned policy are subjected to many pressures, threats and trials. But there is no question that non-alignment and friendship to all countries is the best policy for newly developing countries. The size of our own conference today proves that half of the world has come to understand and value non-alignment as a positive force in international politics.”

At this Summit, two proposals from Ceylon were adopted which called for the Zones of Peace to be closed to Great Power rivalry and conflict, and that the Indian Ocean should be declared a Peace Zone. She was very keen on hosting the Non Aligned leaders in Ceylon and in 1972 at the NAM Foreign Ministers Meeting in Georgetown, Guyana, she offered to host an upcoming summit, and this was awarded accordingly, with the 1976 Summit held in Colombo. 

In the Algerian capital of Algiers for the 4^th NAM Summit Mrs Bandaranaike was instrumental in supporting efforts of the Movement to tread a new path in bringing economic development onto the agenda of NAM. With the Economic Declaration and the Action Programme for Economic Co-operation being adopted, it became evident that the Movement was focused on making a significant difference in the lives of the people it represented by addressing basic needs and improving standards.

When the NAM came to Sri Lanka in August 1976, Mrs Bandaranaike was determined to steer the grouping along a path of economic development whilst emphasizing the need for collective economic self-reliance. This was to reduce the gap between the developed and developing countries through a ‘New International Economic Order’. The Summit in Colombo was seen as a crowning moment in her foreign policy, as the Movement wasn’t just another grouping, or one which didn’t make an impact. From its inception, right through the 60s and 70s NAM remained a critical and crucial grouping, which was the only solace for countries that didn’t want to be engulfed by the opponents of the Cold War.

Ironically the impact of NAM on the Cold War, on Sri Lanka, and the role played by leaders such as Mrs Bandaranaike, among many others internationally, who were identified as stalwarts of the Movement, hasn’t received due recognition or research.

The Commonwealth

After occupying a seat in the Senate or Upper House of Parliament on 5^th August 1960, Prime Minister Bandaranaike tasked herself with due emphasis on domestic policy. Her first official multilateral engagement was in London at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers Conference in March 1961 when Harold Mcmillan was Prime Minister. It was the first Commonwealth Conference at which a woman Head of Government participated. Although the Queen presided over the opening of the sessions, she did not join the deliberations of what was widely regarded as a gentlemen’s club. It wasn’t until May 1979 that the United Kingdom accomplished the task of electing a woman Prime Minister, when Margaret Thatcher entered Downing Street. Other Commonwealth members, notably India, saw Indira Gandhi take on the mantle of leadership in January 1966.

Mrs Bandaranaike once again led the Ceylon delegation to the 13^th Commonwealth Prime Minister’s Conference in July 1963 in London hosted by Prime Minister Sir Alec Douglas-Home. Once the nomenclature changed to the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, she attended the first session in Singapore in January 1971 when it was led by Prime Minister Lee Kwan Yew. He too had undertaken a visit to Ceylon at the initial stage of her second term in August 1970, when Colombo was the first stop on his world tour.

In April 1975, Mrs Bandaranaike attended the third Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Jamaica, hosted by Prime Minister Michael Manley, at which attention was predominantly focused on the Vietnam War. She understood the relevance of working with the Commonwealth and its member states, especially through the strong bonds of friendship she built with leaders of the grouping, which enriched her bilateral relations.

The United Nations

The United Nations and its system was not a new arena for Mrs Bandaranaike. She first accompanied her husband who was Prime Minister in 1956 when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) for the first time after Ceylon had been admitted in December of the previous year. During her first term in office from 1960 to 1965 it had been Sir Claude Corea, Felix Dias Bandaranaike, G. P. Malalasekera and R. S. S. Gunewardene who had participated.

In the second year of her second term, Mrs Bandaranaike raised an issue of growing concern during her first address to the UNGA. She reiterated a call she had made repeatedly, in urging world peace through a nuclear free world, and noted that “the global implications of the proposal (declaring peace zones) require that it should receive universal acceptance and be fitted into the larger design of world peace and security and of general and complete disarmament.”

Her belief in the United Nations and its ability to play a monumental role was highlighted, when she further observed that “we have the Charter and a formidable body of international law, including declarations and resolutions, to illumine our path towards those goals. It is in our minds alone that darkness still exists, a darkness created by fear, hatred and suspicion. Our problem is to rid our minds of those darkening elements.”

When she returned to the UNGA in September 1976, it wasn’t only as the leader of Sri Lanka, but also as the Chair of the Non Aligned Movement. Here she spoke on behalf of two and a half billion people from 86 countries. Questioning the moral and rationale justification for wealth distribution and the insensitivity with which such irregularity was accepted Mrs Bandaranaike remarked that humanity which “has displayed so much ingenuity and brilliance in weaving an intricate fabric of technological and scientific achievement in so short a time in terms of [his] evolution, it should not be so difficult to respond to the call of humanity and justice.”

In March 1974 she championed the need for a World Fertilizer Fund while delivering the keynote address at the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, in Colombo. Having received support, a resolution, co-sponsored by Sri Lanka and New Zealand, was adopted, and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) was tasked with its preparation. This resulted in the birth of the International Fertilizer Supply Scheme Fund four months later, which was to be a boost to agriculture based economies.

A few years later the Food and Agriculture Organisation awarded her the Ceres Medal in recognition of the contribution she made in the field of food self-sufficiency in Sri Lanka. In presenting the medal, named after the Roman goddess of agriculture, in May 1977 the Director General of FAO, Edouard Saouma said that he could “think of no one who, by her actions on behalf of the needy, is more worthy to represent all that is symbolized by Ceres.”

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) invited her as special guest in June 1975, for the special session of the ILO to mark International Women’s Year, and devoted it to the role of women in human progress. Mrs Bandaranaike used the platform to renew her commitment in working towards the progress of peace, justice and equality in the economic sphere. Identifying overarching issues and the need to overcome them, she outlined that “women’s rights, the creation of employment and human resources development, are all excellent ideals, but the pursuit of them in the absence of economic wherewithal, and the prospect of ultimate fulfillment would be both frustrating and self-defeating.”

A week later Mrs Bandaranaike was in Mexico to attend the World Conference on Women. Delivering the keynote address once again, at this UN Conference, Mrs Bandaranaike succinctly outlined the objective of the fight for women’s rights, and the struggle for equality. She remarked “We are not here only to demolish discrimination but to envision the benefits to the human race of integrating this forgotten half of humanity in development.”

Shuttle Diplomacy

Her international engagement wasn’t limited to the arena of multilateral organisations. It extended to the sphere of mediation among large players on the world stage. Mrs Bandaranaike’s mediation in 1962/3 is what modern day International Relations discourse describes as ‘shuttle diplomacy’. It is engaged upon by a third state when tension between two countries has risen to a heightened stance and they are unable to sit down and talk to each other. At the time of her mediation, the term had not been coined, yet the deed remains significant, as it was based on her initiative.

As tensions rose between India and China and a standoff was being experienced, Mrs. Bandaranaike, who had been in office for a little over two years, convened the Colombo Conference in December 1962, bringing together representation from Burma, Cambodia, Egypt, Ghana and Indonesia. Aimed at mediating and attempting to reach a possible solution to the conflict between the two Asian giants, she was successful in averting all out war, although the border issues remain a thorn in their bilateral relations.

On 8^th January 1963, Mrs Bandaranaike visited China to apprise the Chinese Government on the outcome of the deliberations in Colombo. Conveying a positive response, Mao Tse Tung and Chou En Lai, expressed gratitude for her initiative and efforts to promote a peaceful settlement. The visit was a further opportunity to reaffirm the Bandung Principles, whereby it was agreed that ‘the application of these principles and the observance of the spirit of Bandung not only in so far as this problem was concerned but also in the case of all other problems which arose in this area, would assist in their expeditious and peaceful solution.’

Thereafter on 12^th January 1963, the Ceylonese Prime Minister was in India, seeking the concurrence of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru for the Colombo proposals. He accepted the principles of the Colombo Conference in toto and thus conflict, tension and bloodshed were averted between the two large neighbours. On that occasion, Mrs Bandaranaike said “I think it is a lesson of history that war does not solve any question: it only provokes more problems.”

Her passionate stance against war, injustice and inequality, is clearly seen in her approach to multilateralism, and similarly in her bilateral relations with countries in the South Asian neighbourhood and across the world. 

Asian Allies

Whilst Mrs Bandaranaike’s multilateral diplomacy earned her and the country numerous plaudits on the world stage, it was her bilateral engagement that proved the importance of personality, and interactions of leaders at the highest level. Before taking office, Mrs Bandaranaike had opportunities to interact with several world leaders while accompanying her husband to the UN, neighbouring countries and when world leaders arrived in Ceylon. The bonds of friendship built with these leaders would remain throughout her life, and were not limited to her times in power. 

The Nehru family of India was very close to the Bandaranaikes from the 1940s onwards. S. W. R. Bandaranaike and Jawaharlal Nehru had known each other from the time the former was a minister in Ceylon and this particular friendship even changed the path of Ceylon’s foreign policy following his election in 1956.

In December 1960, the new Prime Minister was in New Delhi at the invitation of her Indian counterpart, commencing a long standing official connection with India. Mrs Bandaranaike in return invited Prime Minister Nehru to visit Ceylon in October 1962. The significance of the visit was its timing. Despite growing tension with China, he accepted the invitation, especially for the inauguration of the Bandaranaike Ayurveda Research Centre being named in memory of Prime Minister S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, whom he considered a close friend. He also addressed Parliament during his visit.

In October 1964, she was in India at the invitation of Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri. A crucial matter concerning the settlement of the citizenship status of almost a million person of Indian origin, who had been brought to work on the tea and rubber plantations, was addressed through the Sirima-Shastri Pact that was inked during this visit. It was decided that 525,000 persons of Indian origin would be repatriated to India while 300,000 would be granted Sri Lankan citizenship.

During her period in the Opposition from 1965 to 1970, Mrs Indira Gandhi had come to power, and was a guest in Sri Lanka in April 1973. The visit included an address to Parliament and the two Prime Ministers examined means through which they would settle several issues, chief among which were the resolution of citizenship of the remaining 150, 000 people of Indian origin in Sri Lanka, demarcation of the maritime boundary between the two countries and ownership of the island of Kachchativu. The following year the ownership of Kachchativu was resolved with India renouncing claim to its ownership while the demarcation of the maritime boundary in the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal would be done in 1976. Seen as vital in the context of the United Nations Law of the Sea negotiations, these agreements aided Sri Lanka’s claim of resources in her territorial waters and on her seabed. 

In January 1974, Mrs Bandaranaike and Yugoslav President Josep Tito were Chief Guests at India’s Republic Day ceremony. A historic occasion on which world leaders are invited to grace the Republic Day events with the President and Prime Minister of India, Mrs Bandaranaike was bestowed this rare honour during the premiership of Mrs Indira Gandhi.

Following her defeat in 1977, a Presidential Commission of Inquiry, found her guilty of abuse of power and her civic rights and parliamentary membership were removed in October 1980. This particular act caused grave concern for Mrs Gandhi. One of India’s envoys to Sri Lanka, J. N. Dixit wrote subsequently that ‘one of the main briefs as High Commissioner of India was to persuade Jayewardene to restore her (Mrs Bandaranaike’s) civil rights and to lift the ban on her participation in politics because India was convinced that with her wisdom, experience and great influence on Sri Lankan public opinion, she would contribute to resolving the complexities of Indo-Lanka relations….’ Mrs Bandaranaike was held in such high esteem in India that despite her emphasis that this particular ‘issue was an internal one which should be resolved internally and not through any external interference’, the matter was raised continuously until her rights were restored in January 1986.

The close affinity enjoyed by the two lady Prime Ministers for over three decades, came to an end in October 1984 when Mrs Gandhi was assassinated. Attending the funeral, Mrs Bandaranaike joined a large number of world leaders who arrived in New Delhi for the final rites which took place along the banks of the Ganges. 

Mrs Bandaranaike, though known to have closely associated India and her leaders, always ensured that Sri Lanka’s position and prosperity were not questioned or infringed upon. From her impartial position in 1962 at the height of tension between India and China, to her strong stance on the repatriation of people of Indian origin, her unremitting position on the ownership of Kachchativu, as well as her opposition to the Indo-Lanka Accord, Mrs Bandaranaike never allowed her personal friendship to hinder Sri Lanka’s path, and instead used it for the betterment of the country.

Mrs Bandaranaike was able to nurture close ties with Pakistan during her tenures as well, with the President of Pakistan Field Marshal Muhammad Ayub Khan undertaking a visit in December 1963, followed the next year in September by her own visit to Islamabad, where she addressed a joint session of the Senate and National Assembly of Pakistan. This was a first by any Sri Lankan leader and considered a rare honour which has been bestowed on a very few leaders to date. 

During her second term, Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto visited Sri Lanka in December 1975 wherein he addressed the National State Assembly, becoming the second Pakistani leader to do so. He held extensive discussions with Mrs Bandaranaike on the situation in Pakistan, especially in the period after the break-up of the country and in light of the support Sri Lanka had extended Pakistan in permitting the refueling of civilian aircraft flying between East and West Pakistan.

Relations with China reached an all time high during Mrs Bandaranaike’s administrations, given the establishment of diplomatic relations with the Peoples Republic of China in 1957 by Prime Minister S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike and the historic visit of Premier Chou En-lai in the same year. Mrs Bandaranaike, who had met with Premier Chou once again during her mediation visit in 1963, invited him to Ceylon, an invitation he accepted in February 1964.

The visit saw Premier Chou offering a gift in the name of Prime Minister S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, in appreciation of his efforts in establishing and promoting diplomatic relations and as a symbol of friendship between the two countries. Mrs Bandaranaike requested an international conference hall, and in November 1970 worked commenced on the Bandaranaike Memorial International Conference Hall (BMICH). The early stages of construction saw Mrs Bandaranaike, her Cabinet Ministers, Members of Parliament, and a cross section of society participate in a shramadana-style process for its construction. The building, which was completed four months ahead of schedule, was designed in keeping with the country’s architectural designs, and declared open on 17^th May 1973.

Vice Chairman of the State Council of China Marshal Hsu Hiang-Chien joined Prime Minister Bandaranaike and President William Gopallawa for the ceremony. Speaking at the inauguration Mrs Bandaranaike thanked China for “this outstanding gift” and hoped that the hall would be “an abiding embodiment of Prime Minister Solomon Bandaranaike’s faith in internationalism and the brotherhood of man, as well as the realization of a wish which was dear to his heart that Sri Lanka could someday serve as a meeting ground for nations of the world.” The BMICH stands as a monument to the strong friendship between Sri Lanka and China.

In June 1972, Mrs Bandaranaike undertook a State Visit to China, during which she met with Chinese leader Mao Tse tung, Premier Chou En-lai and senior leaders of the country. In her wide ranging discussions with her counterpart, Mrs Bandaranaike explained the Five Year Plan of her Government. In support of her efforts, the Chinese Government immediately provided Sri Lanka with a long-term loan free of interest. In the area of international relations, Mrs Bandaranaike stressed the proposal for declaring the Indian Ocean a Zone of Peace, a move that was widely supported by China.

Despite the Chinese leadership knowing the closeness enjoyed by the Bandaranaikes and the Nehru/Gandhi family in India, they still worked hard to build strong ties with Sri Lanka during the governments of Mrs Bandaranaike. As a leader of a small power in South Asia, the ability to be accepted in the capitals of India, China and Pakistan at the same time, and continuously, is undoubtedly a herculean task, but one that Mrs Bandaranaike achieved with great finesse and fortitude.

Cold War Engagement

As a founding member of the Non Aligned Movement and as a leader who led her country’s delegation to the first five NAM Summits, Mrs Bandaranaike wouldn’t be expected to have engaged deeply with either protagonist in the Cold War. Contrary to expectation, her interactions with both sides of the divide was extensive and reflected her ability to highlight international concerns, express joint stances of like-minded nations and also derive a suitable degree of leverage in favour of Sri Lanka. 

In December 1961, with the introduction of the Disposals Policy by the United States of America, rubber prices were dropping globally owing to the release of natural rubber from the US stockpiles. Ceylon, as a rubber producing nation was directly affected, as were several other countries, and she wrote to President John F. Kennedy urging him to abandon the policy. She drew attention to the importance of the rubber industry to Ceylon and the serious consequences which the decline in rubber prices was having on the country’s economy.

President Kennedy noted thereafter that he was “fully aware of the seriousness of this situation for Ceylon, which depends heavily on its exports of rubber for foreign exchange earnings and for state revenues. I assure you that the United States will conduct its disposal sales of surplus rubber with great care and that we wish to take all possible steps to minimize any adverse effects which these sales may have on the world market.” President Kennedy brought about modifications to the disposal programme within three weeks.

In April 1962, Mrs Bandaranaike reacted to America’s testing of a nuclear device. Writing once again to President Kennedy, Mrs Bandaranaike claimed that “coming at a time when there is universal demand for the outlawing of these tests ad when the hopes of the world are centered on the current negotiations in Geneva, the resumption of these tests is a grave setback to peace and brings mankind once again to the brink of nuclear destruction.” She was forthright in her standpoint, informing the US President that “the neutralist nations like Ceylon, who are dedicated to the cause of disarmament and the banning of nuclear tests, are shocked at this disregard of their cumulative wishes.”

President Kennedy, in replying Mrs Bandaranaike, recalled her speech in Belgrade, “that every stage and phase of disarmament should be established by having an effective method of inspection and control over its operation and maintenance.” He added that “although there may be some differences between us as to what constitutes ‘effective’ inspection and control, I am heartened that we seem not to differ over the need for it.”

Mrs Bandaranaike’s decision in June 1963 to make the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation the sole importer and distributor of petroleum products in the country caused great consternation in Washington and London, as she nationalized oil companies. The decision came at a time when she was concerned about the lack of a satisfactory mechanism to conserve foreign exchange and to ensure an uninterrupted supply of oil. Her actions led to the invoking of the Hickenlooper amendment which restricted aid from the United States, but President Kennedy was keen to improve relations.

In that same month, notwithstanding the dampening of relations, she was instrumental in leading efforts at the United Nations in raising concern over the discrimination of Buddhists in South Vietnam. By mobilizing world opinion, Mrs Bandaranaike wrote to Indian Prime Minister Nehru, Burmese leader General Ne Win, Prime Minister of Laos Prince Souvanna Phouma, Cambodian leader Prince Sihanouk, Japanese Prime Minister Ikeda, Thai Prime Minister Thanarat and Nepalese King Mahendra and called on them to support diplomatic efforts in alleviating the suffering of Buddhists in Vietnam.

Her engagement in what may be termed ‘Buddhist Diplomacy’, saw her galvanizing support and appealing to President Kennedy once again to use his good offices with the Government of South Vietnam to ensure the granting of freedom of worship and religious equality for this community. 

In July 1963, Mrs Bandaranaike welcomed the initialing of the Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty by Britain, the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Issuing a message on this occasion she stated that “this is indeed an important first step on the road to world peace. If the present Treaty, as we genuinely hope, could lead to a total ban on nuclear tests, it would indeed be hailed as the most significant act of peace since the Second World War.” “Ceylon,” she said was hopeful that “the present achievement of the three powers will usher a new era of international confidence and pave the way for even greater achievements towards general and complete disarmament.”

In November 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated. Writing to Mrs Jacqueline Kennedy, Mrs Bandaranaike noted that “as a wife and a mother who herself lost her husband in such tragic circumstances, I know how you must feel in this hour of grief.” His passing ended a bond of friendship between the leaders of two vastly differing countries, yet remains testimony to the ability for leaders to share mutual respect for each other. 

Upon her visit to New York in October 1971 to address the United Nations General Assembly, Mrs Bandaranaike undertook a private visit to Washington where she held bilateral discussions with President Richard Nixon in the Oval Office, and with Secretary of State William Rogers, in addition to being hosted by the US First Lady. President Nixon had a strong interest in Sri Lanka, having visited in November 1953, when serving as Vice President.

Deeply aware of the ramifications of engaging with a single super power during the Cold War, Mrs Bandaranaike undertook a state visit to Moscow in October 1963, with the aim of strengthening relations between the two countries and continuing the international efforts she had undertaken in the short span of three years since her election. As the first Sri Lankan Prime Minister to ever visit the Soviet Union, she held extensive discussions with Premier Nikita Khrushchev and was successful in negotiating the purchase of oil at a cheaper price as Ceylon would be buying in large quantities from the 01^st of January 1964 when the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation would be responsible for complete distribution in Ceylon.

The visit which was labeled a ‘mission of Friendship’ was hailed by the Russians. Addressing a state function in Moscow, Mrs Bandaranaike noted that “it was when Mr Bandaranaike himself was planning to visit your country that his tragic assassination took place. I am happy that I have been able to fulfill a wish that we both shared – a visit to the Soviet Union.”

In November 1974, she was invited to the Soviet Union and Georgia, which saw her travelling to Tashkent, Moscow and Tbilisi. Meeting with Premier Kosygin and Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko, Mrs Bandaranaike’s visit strengthened relations with the Soviet Union, which had dispatched a special plane for the Prime Minister and her delegation to travel to and from Moscow.

Her interactions with the Soviet Union didn’t deter her from closely associating Yugoslav President Marshal Josep Broz Tito, who had visited Ceylon in January 1959 and was identified as a pillar of the Non-Aligned Movement, and with whom she had shared many international platforms. Their engagement throughout her terms of office consolidated relations between the two countries and resulted in a friendship that extended beyond her years in political office. During Mrs Bandaranaike’s illnesses, Marshal Tito had offered facilities in Yugoslavia for treatment. His death in May 1980 resulted in Mrs Bandaranaike flying to Belgrade to pay her last respects.

Global Outreach

Mrs Bandaranaike’s foreign policy included global outreach, across political ideologies, and was geared towards enhancing the prospects of the island nation. This dialogue was promoted with a cross section of countries from the different regions of the world and saw her meeting her counterparts often at the bilateral level, but also on the sidelines of multilateral fora.

With Ceylon being held in high esteem by the Egyptian people owing to the stand of the country during the tripartite aggression against Egypt in 1956, Mrs Bandaranaike was accorded a warm welcome by President Gamel Abdel Nasser and Prime Minister Ali Sabry during her visit in October 1963. Disarmament and tension in South Vietnam topped the agenda of her discussions which also resulted in the United Arab Republic (UAR) agreeing to purchase a higher quota of tea from Ceylon. Egypt, which had been joined to Syria to form the United Arab Republic, had played a key role with Ceylon at the height of the Sino-Indian border dispute and exerted tremendous effort to avoid an outbreak of war.

Following the death of President Nasser in September 1970 Mrs Bandaranaike attended his funeral and also marked his passing in Ceylon with the declaration of two days of national mourning for a leader who had come to the rescue of the island at a time when an oil shortage was experienced. His immediate dispatching of vessels was an act for which Mrs Bandaranaike remained ever grateful.

In April 1975, Mrs Bandaranaike visited Iraq for four days. The visit came at a time when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was sharply increasing oil prices and countries like Sri Lanka were feeling the direct impact of such changes. During discussions with Vice President Saddam Hussein, Mrs Bandaranaike was able to comprehensively explain the damage being done to developing countries. Finally Iraq decided to supply 250, 000 tonnes of oil on a four year deferred payment scheme at a very low rate of interest, which was a welcome move.

Vehemently opposed to apartheid in South Africa, Mrs Bandaranaike, speaking in the Senate in January 1964 noted that “we have subscribed to the imposition of economic sanctions against South Africa, although we have said that for such sanctions to be effective all nations of the world must unite in the applying of these sanctions and it would be futile for small countries such as ours to seek to impose such sanctions unilaterally merely as a gesture but without effect.”

Extending her support to Nelson Mandela and his struggle to free South Africa from Apartheid, Mrs Bandaranaike, who although never meeting Mandela himself, raised concern on several occasions in international fora. Following Mandela’s release from prison, he would frequently recall Mrs Bandaranaike’s support for his long and arduous battle and the support received from Sri Lanka, noting with appreciation the letters of support she had sent him while he was imprisoned.

In January 1975, Zambian President Kenneth Kaunda with whom Mrs Bandaranaike had interacted at several international fora undertook a visit to Sri Lanka, at a time when preparations were being made for the Non Aligned Movement summit.

With Canada and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, she enjoyed a close friendship which extended to his family. Undertaking a four day visit to Ceylon in January 1971, Prime Minister Trudeau acknowledged the high regard with which he held Ceylon in the Commonwealth, as a country that accommodated two languages and four religions which was an example for Quebec and Canada. Mrs Bandaranaike reciprocated the visit in October that year.

In Mexico in June 1975, she held discussions with President Luis Echeverría Álvarez and senior Ministers in his Government, and was able to secure Mexico’s agreement to purchase a larger quantity of cinnamon. Her visit was followed in quick succession by the visit of President Álvarez to Sri Lanka.

In October 1963, Mrs Bandaranaike was in Czechoslovakia for interactions with Prime Minister Jozef Lenart and President Antonin Novotny, as well as in Poland meeting Prime Minister Josef Cyrankiewcz, where she was feted, especially by the Polish Women’s League which drew inspiration from her achievements.

In December 1970, she received Pope Paul VI who undertook a short visit to Sri Lanka. She was in the Vatican in September 1973 during which she had a private audience with the Pope at Castel Gandolfo.

Undertaking a four day official visit to the United Kingdom in October 1971, Mrs Bandaranaike, who was the guest of Prime Minister Edward Heath, appreciated the support extended by the UK earlier that year in tackling the youth uprising in Ceylon. In addition to meeting the Queen, the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, she also discussed the implications for Ceylon if Britain joined the European Economic Community when she met the Chief British Common Market Negotiator, Geoffrey Rippon.

Mrs Bandaranaike undertook a visit to West Germany at the invitation of Chancellor Helmut Schmidt in September 1974, where the energy crisis evolving in the world and its impact on developing countries was the focus of discussion.

In October 1976, Mrs Bandaranaike was in Oslo, where she met with her counterpart Odvar Nordli who welcomed the effort made by her in international affairs, noting the Non-Aligned Movement and the role Sri Lanka had played in the Law of the Sea Conference, chaired by Ambassador Shirley Amerasinghe.

Embarking on an East Asian tour, Mrs Bandaranaike visited Jakarta in January 1976 for deliberations with Indonesian President Suharto, then flew to Bangkok, where she was the guest of Prime Minister Kukrit Pramojand and also met with King Bhumibol Adulyadej and Queen Sirikit. In Rangoon on the final leg of the tour, she was hosted by the Prime Minister, Brigadier General Sein Win, and President of Burma, General Ne Win. During her visit, Mrs Bandaranaike also met with Burmese politician and diplomat, Khin Kyi, who was the spouse of the assassinated Burmese leader Aung San and mother of Aung San Suu Kyi.

Covering other East Asian countries later that year, Mrs Bandaranaike was a guest of Prime Minister Datuk Hussein Onn and Deputy Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed. They expressed appreciation on behalf of the Government of Malaysia for the permission granted for a hijacked plane from Kuala Lumpur to refuel in Colombo. She was also received by the King, Sultan Yahya Petra. Thereafter Mrs Bandaranaike visited Manila as a guest of President Ferdinand and Mrs Imelda Marcos, before leaving for Tokyo, where Mrs Bandaranaike held talks with her Japanese counterpart Takeo Miki resulting in Japan pledging increased grant and project aid. In addition to visiting Mikimoto Pearl Island and the city of Kyoto, Mrs Bandaranaike was also hosted by Emperor Hirohito and Empress Kojun.

The enormity of the task was confounded when realizing that Mrs Sirimavo Bandaranaike served not only as Prime Minister but also as Minister of External Affair and Defence during her terms from 1960 to 1965 and 1970 to 1977. It is also understood that stalwarts within the political and bureaucratic frameworks in Sri Lanka greatly aided her in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy. Felix Dias Bandaranaike from the political milieu, with W. T. Jayasinghe, Dr Vernon L. B. Mendis, and N. Q. Dias among many others, as well as Bradman Weerakoon and M. D. D. Peiris, played monumental roles in assisting the Prime Minister.

Her enthusiasm in foreign policy and international relations saw the inauguration of the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies (BCIS) in December 1974 and the Bandaranaike International Diplomatic Training Institute (BIDTI) in September 1995. The two institutions remain an embodiment of her contribution to the world of international relations and diplomacy to this date, with a great number eager to delve into the world at large, walking through their doors daily.

Mrs Bandaranaike was the first woman Prime Minister in the world and a Sri Lankan stateswoman who made a significant contribution to the realm of global affairs. She blazed a trail that few have attempted to follow. Irrespective of the nature of political belief, support or preference, the 60^th anniversary of her election is a poignant reminder that a Sri Lankan overcame immense challenges, and achieved much in the international arena for her country and its people, and that Sri Lankan was Sirimavo Ratwatte Dias Bandaranaike.