Focusing on the centre and not the periphery

Anybody familiar with the political compulsions impacting the state of Tamil Nadu would understand why it has to keep the 'Lankan issue' alive. In Tamil Nadu it is parochial, identity-based politics that dominate. Those with even a nodding acquaintance with the politics of this state would know that no government there could survive undisturbed for long without it playing what has come to be known as the ethnic 'card'. That is, the Tamil majority is the state government's support base and this constituency would need to be continually placated by the ruling party or coalition for the purpose of political survival.

So, it should not come as a surprise if both DMK and AIDMK- led governments depend heavily on the 'Lankan issue' for the mobilization of local support and for its perpetuation. The 'cause of the Lankan Tamils', thus, assumes tremendous importance for the ruling party or coalition in Tamil Nadu, and the recent resolution moved against Sri Lanka in the Tamil Nadu assembly by the AIADMK administration must be viewed in this light as a power consolidation ploy by the state government. Thus, the Sri Lankan government is right in emphasizing that what is of greater importance for it in this context is the policy position of the central government of India and not that of the Tamil Nadu state government.

This is as it should be because it is the central government of India which frames and implements the Indian state's international and regional policies. Hence, the Lankan state's dealings on the so-called Tamil issue would be entirely with the Indian centre. In other words, it is the centre's policy perspectives on Sri Lankan issues which matter.

We do not have reason to believe that the Indian centre would dilute in any way the cordiality and goodwill which have characterized Indo-Lanka ties over issues seen as emerging from Sri Lanka's humanitarian operation. The joint Indo-Lanka declaration which emerged from External Affairs Minister Prof, G.L. Peiris' most recent visit to India puts the record straight on the commonalities between the two countries and on the policy perspectives which would be determining inter-state ties.

One thing that we could be certain of is that India would not be acting in a manner which would compromise Sri Lanka's best interests. State governments may be under pressure from their local constituencies to adopt this or that policy posture but it is the policy of the centre which constitutes national policy on any question and it is the latter which matters in the conduct of inter-state relations. The centre would need to take a broad overview on matters relating to it and a close neighbour and it is this perspective which the observer must consider to be of the utmost importance in this context.

It should be clear that the Indian state is not intent on being at cross-purposes with Sri Lanka on issues pertaining to the latter's conflict. India was not only one of the earliest countries to ban the LTTE, but also proved to be of crucial importance in crippling the LTTE's war machine in the latter stages of the conflict. It was firmly established that India was with Sri Lanka in cornering and crushing LTTE terror. Therefore, there has been and will be a great deal of commonality between the countries on the need of saying 'no' to terror.

Since the ending of the conflict, India has been of immense assistance to Sri Lanka in the reconstruction and rejuvenation of the North and in the rendering of humanitarian assistance to our IDPs. Thus, there is no questioning the abundance of goodwill which has been flowing to Sri Lanka from India. Indo-Lanka relations could not be better and the rumblings from Tamil Nadu should not be considered to be of pivotal importance in the shaping of India's policy towards Sri Lanka.

Moreover, Sri Lanka has pledged to go beyond the 13th amendment in dealing with the conflict and this is a matter of some satisfaction. The most encouraging thing about such pledges is that the Lankan state is remaining committed to power devolution as an answer to our conflict. That is, the Lankan state is remaining committed to a political solution. Thus have war mongerism and triumphalism been showed the door. These positions, would, no doubt, lead to cordial exchanges between the Lankan state and the currently visiting high-powered Indian state delegation and conduce to even more cordial inter-state ties.

Therefore, the forging and implementation of foreign policy are extremely complex matters which cannot be viewed from populist perspectives. In the crafting of foreign policy, a state is usually guided by its national interest and this would prompt it to base its actions on its long term interests and not on what it sees as short term gains.