Features
International political cleavages sharpen in South Asia
Visiting US Secretary of Defence Mark Esper (left) and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar in New Delhi on Tuesday.
So, Sri Lanka seems to be in the eye of a renewed international political storm in South Asia. First, it was a visit to Sri Lanka by a high-powered Chinese state delegation and hardly has the splurge of commentary surrounding this bilateral interaction died down when the country is witnessing a visit by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo amid a barrage of barbs and brickbats originating among seemingly incensed local political circles.
Essentially, Sri Lanka is being viewed as coming under unprecedented pressure to succumb to the demands of these big powers. She is being wooed, but is she a ‘reluctant bride’? Among other things, this question needs to be addressed satisfactorily by local opinion. It needs to be noted that Pompeo is here on the invitation of the Sri Lankan government. There’s no question of any glaring arm-twisting occurring. If this is so, what are the compulsions, if any, that have come into play in US-Sri Lanka relations?
The answer to this question needs to be sought in the realm of current international politics but it needs to be said right away that Sri Lanka has no choice but to surrender to the most insistent demands of both, the US and China. Right now, she has very few options.
The latter factor is tending to be increasingly accentuated by the economic woes generated by the current pandemic. In fact, aggravating economic difficulties will be the lot of the world and it would be foolish for the global South in particular to ignore the stark reality that the world’s GDP would plunge by some five percent in the current circumstances. Sri Lanka has no choice but to say yes to the principal demands emanating from the US and China but Sri Lanka will do so in a way that would not infuriate local sections that consider it opportune to be mindlessly rhetorical on issues growing out of this country’s ties with the US in particular. Put bluntly, Sri Lanka ‘will play for time’ over insistent controversial demands coming from the major powers in question but it is a foregone conclusion that she will prove amenable to these powers by eventually cooperating with them.
Moreover, the social group that is in power in Sri Lanka currently is no different from those sections that have been at the levers of power locally since 1977. A common feature that binds these ruling sections is their strong linkage with transnational capital. Basically, they would do the bidding of major capitalist powers, such as the US, because their economic interests are bound up with those of these powers.
Thus, does a class analysis come in useful to understand the directions in which Sri Lanka’s foreign policy is evolving. And this goes for the majority of countries of the South. As Chinese scholar Chen Jixiang expressed it,’…America lures the elite class of a target country to promote full privatization and financial liberalization by utilizing US-led globalization..’ (See his paper titled, ‘The US “Pivot to Asia” and China-Pakistan Relations’ in the book ‘China and India’ edited by Paramita Mukherjee, Arnab K. Deb and Miao Pang, published by SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.)
There is no doubt that the wooing of Sri Lanka and some other states of South Asia by China has prompted the US to be particularly wary of developments in Sri Lanka’s foreign relations but intensifying tensions in US-China ties also need to be assessed against the backdrop of the upcoming US presidential poll.
True to form, President Trump could be said to be playing the ‘anti-China card’ with redoubled zeal with an eye on the white supremacist vote but the steady rise of China in Asia too needs to be factored in as a significant external cause for the US’ need to strengthen its relations with Sri Lanka and other selected states of this region, with India proving to be most prominent among the latter. In fact, good relations with India have been figuring markedly in the US’ policy agenda with regard to South Asia over the past fifteen years or more.
As could be seen, the US and India have a mutual interest in containing the perceived rising influence of China in this part of the world. The Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA)is the latest US-India accord that ought to be viewed as strengthening this alliance. It is a high-water mark in security and defence cooperation between the countries.
However, the marked stepping-up of cooperation in US-India ties came with the US-India Civil Nuclear Cooperation accord between the countries in 2008. The latter signalled in no uncertain terms US interest in boosting India’s self-sufficiency in the generation of nuclear power for civilian uses. Considering that South Asia is energy starved, this is an exceptional cooperative venture in US-India ties.
Considering the above developments it may be opined in some quarters that the battle lines in our region among the two biggest powers have been drawn. But no battle is likely to be fought in the foreseeable future. This is on account of the fact that the fallout from a fight would be devastating for all concerned. Self-interest is likely to be a foremost concern.
However, the policy fallout from these tensions for South Asia could be worrying. While India is in a ‘class of her own’ in this region and could afford to exercise a considerable degree of independence in handling her foreign relations, smaller states in particular will be obliged to walk a tight rope between the US and China and between India and China. They would find out that India’s sensitivities would need to be intently watched. They would need to attach topmost priority to good neighbourliness, in consideration of India’s dominant presence.