Kadirgamar wants to make Commonwealth relevant

[December 2, 2003 - 5.30 GMT] 

By PK Balachanddran 

[Reproduced from the Hindustan Times, November 29, 2003]

Lakshman Kadirgamar of Sri Lanka, who is believed to have a good chance of winning the election for the post of Commmonwealth Secretary General early next month, has ambitious plans to make the 52-nation group of former British colonies, a vibrant one, well equipped to take on the challenges of the emerging world. 

The popular impression here is that Kadirgamar will gain by the alienation of his rival, New Zealander Don Mckinnon, from the Afro-Asian group.

As the incumbent Secretary General, McKinnon has alienated the 16-member African group by his abrasive style. The stand that the four-member White group has taken on the emotive Zimbabwe/Robert Mugabe issue is also disliked by the majority non-Whites.

But if he did become Secretary General, he would not tolerate any kind racial conflict within the Commonwealth, Kadirgamar told Hindustan Times in an exclusive interview in Colombo on Saturday. 

"I believe that the sensitivities of all the people concerned must be taken into account, because they are real. I will resolve all controversial issues in a reasonable and fair way and by saying the right things in an acceptable way. A Secretary General has to be aware of the fact that the Commonwealth is a multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-religious body. In such a grouping, the need to promote harmony in all circumstances, some times in very trying circumstances, becomes paramount. The Secretary General must embody that spirit and reflect it," he said. 

Excerpts:

HT: The Commonwealth is often derided as a relic of the past, doing precious little other than meeting once in a while to socialise. What do you think should be its role in the present day world?

LK: The Commonwealth should be able to do much more. It has got three great assets. English is the first and foremost. It helps internal communication and cooperative action. The second is its immense diversity. It is an ideal forum to discuss the problems of coexistence between diverse peoples and demonstrate cooperation across many kinds of barriers. The third asset is its commitment to democracy and the Rule of Law. The Commonwealth can set an example to the rest of the world in terms of these core values.

I would like the Commonwealth to be a forum for a dialogue on Fundamentalism and Terrorism- which are problems afflicting many of the member states and the rest of the world. Policies on these can be formulated in the Commonwealth. 

Terrorism should be dealt with wisely, having a thorough understanding of the causes of terrorism. I do not like the 'gung ho' approach to it. The United Nations is too big a body to meaningfully discuss these issues. The Commonwealth is diverse like the UN but is not so unwieldy.

I would like the Commonwealth to enter into relationships with other groupings like ASEAN, SAARC, EU and CARICOM, making use of the fact that some of its members are also part of these groupings. The Commonwealth should also interact with China.

The Commonwealth must engage NGOs and civil society in its development work as governments as such will be playing a very limited role in the years to come. The control of HIV AIDS ( a major problem in Africa), the promotion of English and computer literacy and sponsorship of cultural and intellectual exchange will be other key areas of interest to me. The Commonwealth must be made "attractive" to the youth. Sports must be encouraged as they bring people together.

HT: What about funding?

LK: In my view funds are not a problem if a project is good. Bill Gates has set aside US$ 35 billion for worthwhile projects worldwide. Commonwealth could bid for it even though the US is not a member. The Commonwealth Secretariat must be revamped if it is take on the kind of work which needs to be done in the changing world. It needs wide ranging expertise. Its procedures must be streamlined.

HT: How do you propose to resolve the Robert Mugabe/Zimbabwe issue in the context of the African threat to boycott CHOGM ?

LK: I do not want to react to this question now as I am not familiar with
the details, as yet. It would be wrong on my part to make a comment before thoroughly familiarising myself with all aspects of the problem.

On the peace process in Sri Lanka

Kadirgamar has been a key participant in the Sri Lankan peace process in his capacity as Advisor to President Chandrika Kumaratunga on the matter. But he is clearly unhappy with the way it is being conducted now. The on-going rapprochement between President Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesighe, has made him somewhat of a misfit in the proceedings given his strong views on the LTTE and international involvement.

HT: Are you sanguine about the outcome of the current bid to find common ground between President Chandrika Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe?

LK: I told the Prime Minister that there should be an agreement on a number of specific issues, especially the LTTE issue, the constitutional proposals and the reaction to the LTTE's proposals. I must say ,the Prime Minister was not completely averse to this kind of consensus.

HT: Will the MOU, now being worked out between the President and the Prime Minister, tackle the issues on hand? 

LK: The MOU is not about the big issue - the LTTE question, or the basic approach to the peace process or the peace talks. A common approach to the constitutional question has not been taken up for discussion. The MOU is about the nitty gritty of working together, generally.

I am not happy with the fact that the government (led by Ranil Wickremesinghe) has not responded in any way to the LTTE's controversial proposal for an Interim Administration. The Opposition has come up with its response. Sooner, rather than later, the country must have a consensus-based response. It is time we had that.

The Joint Peace Council suggested by the President could be a forum to discuss the matter. If there is no consensus or if there is no clarity in the southern Sri Lanka side, Prabhakaran will get stronger.

But Pabhakaran has constraints too. He needs money for the development of the North East to keep the Tamil people on his side. He wants the money on his own terms, but the international donors want him to conform to international norms. The EU's Chris Patten was very tough with him. Prabhakaran may have become belligerent as a result of this.He would have appeared in a safari suit in his TV appearance on Heroes' Day if Patten had kow towed to him. But he was in his camouflage fatigues instead. There was a message in that.

HT: While foreign involvement in solving the Sri Lankan conflict is
welcome, don't you think that Sri Lanka may lose its sovereignty in the
process over a time?

LK: I am basically against foreign intrusions into a nation's sovereignty. I
do agree that sovereignty cannot be completely self contained. No nation is an island unto itself. But all said and done a nation's territorial integrity and sovereignty are still valid. This is despite the global debate on issues like Human Rights and Genocide. The disintegration of states is not a desirable situation. Partitions cause a haemorrhage with long term consequences.

Too much of international involvement may lead to a situation in which the government of the country may not be able to take decisions on its own. It might lead to a situation in which foreign powers may be having a decisive say even in domestic affairs. When this happens sovereignty gets compromised.

There are far too many players in the Sri Lankan peace process. There seems to be an abject dependence on the international community.

Sovereignty is important for a small country because it represents its self respect. And if a country loses its self respect, no other country will respect it. National pride is not the same thing as xenophobia. You can deal with bigger countries if you present your case with dignity. Prabhakaran is conducting himself in such a way that he is gaining the respect of the outside world. The rest of Sri Lanka would seem to be suffering in contrast.

HT: What role do you think India can play?

LK: India's role is becoming more and more crucial. India need not make strong statements but it has to be concerned about what is going on in Sri Lanka. It has to think about its options in regard to the emerging situation in Sri Lanka. India cannot accept an independent Eelam. It cannot accept a confederal set up either. It has to be wary of "creeping separatism", an incremental movement towards separation. After sometime this may end up in an irreversible situation. India has to be concerned about the fate of the Trincomalee harbour.

India is beginning to take a closer interest in the Sri Lanka situation. I could see the change when I went to New Delhi in September. The LTTE's ring around Trincomalee worried Brajesh Mishra (a top aide to the Indian Prime Minister)

HT: Is the Sri Lankan government accommodating India's concerns?

LK: The government says it is. If the Sri Lankan government wants to give more and more to the LTTE what should India do? What are its options? Indian think tanks must work on this.

HT: There is a feeling that you are opting out of the peace process or that you are being eased out. Will you be part of the process at all? 

LK: I am not opting out of the peace process. Even if become Commonwealth Secretary General, I'll be taking up the post only in March-April 2004.However, things are running out of steam now. At present there is rapprochement between the President and the Prime Minister. The President has softened her stand to get the process going. I thought I should recede to the background. My views are well known and I have said what I want to say. The President said she would like to consult me. I replied that I would always be available, even if I am in London. After all we would be at the two ends of a telephone.

PRINT THIS STORY

Contact Information: Send mail to gosl@presidentsl.org with questions or comments about this web site. 
Last Updated Date: December 1, 2003  -5.30 GMT.