Features
Are they two peas in a pod?
Economic policy and foreign policy:
By Neville Ladduwahetty
The general practice of governments of most nation states is to treat Economic policies and Foreign policy as two separate components of their national interest. Consequently, while the field of economics is littered with economic specialists, the field of foreign relations is confined to a relatively few. Perhaps, the tendency to do so is because of the popular understanding that economics is driven by market forces, while foreign policy is driven by a different paradigm, that being how nations conduct their relations with other nation states, even in matters that could include economics. This has resulted in the two subjects being handled by most governments as separate branches.
For instance, the financial crisis that Sri Lanka is currently facing is due to a combination of misguided economic policies, one of which was the lowering of taxes, causing the internal economy to be seriously impacted to a degree that caused budget deficits, and inflation to skyrocket, as a result of printing money, and the other being indulging in indiscriminately excessive dollar borrowings, from readily available sources, to develop infrastructure projects, where the returns were mostly in local Rupees. These lending sources took advantage of their bilateral relations to tempt Sri Lanka, because the significance of the island’s strategic location was critical to further their geopolitical interests. What Sri Lanka is experiencing currently is primarily due to these factors.
BLURRING of ECONOMIC and FOREIGN POLICIES
The nexus between Economic Policies and Foreign Policy is manifesting itself most prominently with neighbouring India. In April 2022, Sri Lanka’s debt to India was USD 1.041 billion. Today, it is nearly USD 5 Billion. While the need for India to engage in Sri Lanka’s internal and external affairs is motivated by self-interest, the fact that it would impact on Sri Lanka’s economic dependence is indisputable. Furthermore, it would also be a fetter to Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and independence to further relations with other countries with the view to furthering Sri Lanka’s own interests.
Sri Lanka is currently seriously campaigning for the importance of “economic integration between Sri Lanka and India”. Whether such a policy has been approved by the President and the Cabinet of Ministers, who, incidentally, are Constitutionally “charged with the direction and control of the Government”, is not known. As an extension of this policy, “India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration, since July 2022, has been exploring the possibility of bringing countries that are short of dollars into the Rupee settlement mechanism. Designating the INR as a legal currency in Sri Lanka has provided Sri Lanka much needed liquidity support to tide over its economic crisis amid inadequate availability of US dollars …” (Sunday Observer, May 7, 2023).
While designating the INR as the legal currency in Sri Lanka would be favourable to India, it would amount to Sri Lanka piling up stacks of Indian currency, through trade and tourism, not knowing what to do with it all, because the Indian rupee is not only a non-convertible currency but also because the distortion between exports from India being five times the exports from Sri Lanka to India, as stated herein. would seriously disadvantage Sri Lanka. For instance, “During the last 26 years the exports of India to Sri Lanka have increased at an annualized rate of 10.1%, from $397M, in 1995, to $4.87B, in 2021. In 2021, India did not export any services to Sri Lanka. In 2021, Sri Lanka exported $1B to India (https://oec.world › bilateral-country › ind › partner › lka)
The experience between India and Russia, in respect of oil exports from Russia, was no different. Russia realizing that they would be stuck with Billions of Indian Rupees, for bilateral trade with India, suspended negotiations “after months of negotiations failed to convince Moscow to keep Indian Rupees in its coffers. This will be a major setback for Indian importers of cheap oil and coal from Russia who were awaiting a permanent rupee payment mechanism to help lower currency conversion costs …. Russia is not comfortable holding rupees and wants to be paid in Chinese yuan.” (The Island, May 5, 2023).
“Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, on February 21, last year, India’s imports from Russia have risen to $51.3 billion, until April 5, from $10.6 billion in the same period in the previous year, according to another Indian government official” (Ibid). The fact that Russia is prepared to accept such a large outstanding debt, to be settled in Chinese yuan ,reflects the strength of the bilateral relationship between Russia and China, at the expense of India. This underscores the power of bilateral relationships that could at times influence economic issues and vis-a-versa.
Drawing a lesson from this Russian/Indian experience, Sri Lanka should test the strength of its relationships and explore settling its outstanding debts to China, India and Japan, in their respective currencies, instead of settling them in US Dollars.
THE SRI LANKAN EXPERIENCE
Although Sri Lanka, then Ceylon, started out with Foreign affairs being linked with Defence, Foreign relations came under the jurisdiction of an independent Ministry, with the passage of time, thereby causing economic policies and foreign policy to function under two separate Cabinet ministers. However, during the early stages of this separation, bilateral relations had a significant influence on the determination of economic priorities.
For instance, the impetus to manufacturing was initiated with the introduction of the steel and tyre factories, from Russia. The flour mill from Russia contributed to meet the food needs. Another was the textile mill, at Athurugiriya, from The German Democratic Republic (GDR). It was the strength of bilateral relationships that contributed to further the economic development of Sri Lanka. Likewise, the urgent power needs of Sri Lanka, in the late 1970s and 1980s, compelled the then government to initiate the Accelerated Mahaweli Programme. The Implementation of the programme depended on harnessing the needed funds.
To secure the funds, the late Gamini Dissanayake invited all the Ambassadors ,and local heads of aid missions in Colombo, to a detailed discussion because “the raising of foreign funds for the construction of the Projects and the implementation of the downstream development programmes”, presented themselves as the most formidable task. It was the bilateral relations with countries such as “the USA, the UK, Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and from international funding agencies, like the World Bank, through outright grants, such as from the UK, and soft loans that became the key for Sri Lanka to find the needed financial resources to implement the Accelerated Mahaweli programme.
These infrastructure projects did not impose financial strains on the economy, not only because the cost of funding was low but also the return on the investment, which was in the form of Dollar savings for power generation, was almost immediate. However, the more recently implemented projects were funded with high cost short term loans, where the return on investment was over too long a period to justify their viability. For instance, there are several grounds on which the network of expressways constructed can be justified, but not the funding through Dollar loans at high interest rates. Instead, they should have been funded through a gasoline tax, as was done in the U.S.A. following WWII, because at the end of the day, it is the user that foots the bill, similar to any Value Added Tax.
What was the motivation for the strategy adopted? Was it corruption, or was Sri Lanka tempted by the creditors into taking advantage of bilateral relations with a view to seeking a foothold in order to exploit its strategic location to pursue their own geopolitical interests? Whatever the reason, or reasons, the fact remains that the current crisis is because Sri Lanka was not astute enough to be aware of “Greeks bearing gifts.”
CONCLUSION
It is evident from the foregoing that Economic Policies and Foreign Policy do not work in isolation of each other. Instead, the material cited above demonstrate that Foreign Relations and Foreign Policy have a significant influence over Economic Policies even to the point of outwitting Economic Policies that have negative consequences. For instance, the offer of three 100 MW Nuclear Reactors, by Russia, is motivated by bilateral relations and certainly not by economic considerations, because it would amount to importing uranium instead of oil. The Light Rail Project, at a reported cost of USD 2.0 Billion from Japan, that has soured Sri Lanka/Japan relations, is similar in vein, because the loan is in Dollars and the benefits are in Rupees.
The clear reason for this is because Sri Lanka does not have an Economic Plan. If it had, Sri Lanka would be in sounder position to politely say NO to bilateral unsolicited offers, without an impact on Foreign Relations.
One guiding principle of such an Economic Plan should be that if the funding for a project is in International convertible currency, the return on the investment should be in the same currency, or, the equivalent reduction in imports should be in a convertible currency.
Not only does Sri Lanka NOT have an Economic Plan, she does not have a clear Foreign Policy either. There is no more talk of being Non-Aligned. There is not much talk of being Neutral, either. This vacuum is tempting all the major powers to seek a foothold in Sri Lanka because of its relevance to Indo-Pacific confrontations; a trend that would make Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and territorial integrity vulnerable. The lack of a clear Foreign Policy gives the opportunity for the Government to respond to each situation and to every offer, individually. Such an individualized approach not only allocates too much power to the President, and a few others close to him, but also could change with a change of Government. This approach is not in the best interests of Sri Lanka, particularly because of global uncertainties in terms of currency related economic issues, as well as the other maneuverings going on around Sri Lanka, arising from Indo-Pacific tensions.
The President has repeatedly commented on these tensions. The most recent being at the BMICH when he stated that Sri Lanka “doesn’t want to get caught between escalating US-China tensions…. We are now being asked to choose sides”. However, he had stated that Sri Lanka would not succumb to the pressures (Daily Mirror, May 11, 2023). If Sri Lanka is not to take sides and/or succumb to pressures, the policy to pursue vigorously the policy of “integrating” with India would be a contradiction.
The President’s recommendation has been to rely on a strengthened ASEAN in the coming decades. Reliance on a future strengthened ASEAN misses the most critical point that the strategic location of Sri Lanka is unique in comparison to that of other ASEAN countries. Consequently, the pressures on them would be significantly less and different to that of Sri Lanka. This fact alone requires Sri Lanka to develop its own policy as to how it handles these escalating tensions.
Therefore, it is imperative that clear bipartisan policies be developed in respect of the link between economic and foreign policy issues. In addition, because of this inevitable interplay between economic policy and foreign policy, the separate institutional arrangements that currently exist should be reformed and reorganized to include an overarching arrangement in order to foster greater integration between economic and foreign policies, when making decisions that impact on both sectors, and eventually, the country.
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
