Is JVP/NPP signalling left and turning right?
By Lasanda Kurukulasuriya
Since their visit to India at the invitation of the Indian government in February, leaders of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna-led National People’s Power coalition have become the poster-boys and girls of a complicated Sri Lankan political landscape, in a pre-election period. The once-marginal parliamentary group’s leader is now viewed as a potential future president. Looking beyond the optics of the party’s ongoing image makeover, what is the message behind the Indian ‘invite?’
“The message is in the invitation” JVP/NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said, on Sirasa TV. “Our response is that we are ready. We are not an extremist project (aanthika deshapalana viyapaarayak nove) We are a project ready to work with any state that will allow us to advance the aspirations of the people without conflicts.” Though AKD’s remarks in this interview by Wasantha Maasinhage on 15.02.24 were wide-ranging, the party has otherwise been reticent about discussions they had with Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, NSA Ajit Doval, Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra and others they met from 5th to 9th Feb. Asked what they discussed with the Indian government, JVP Propaganda Secretary Vijithat Herath is reported as saying their talks had been ‘mostly on regional security issues.’
It appears the JVP has not only moved away from its earlier anti-Indian rhetoric, but made a startling turnaround on Indo-Sri Lanka relations. On the subject of foreign policy, the JVP leader stressed the need to understand and accommodate India’s sensitivities in dealings with other countries. The following exchange is from the interview:
AKD: “India is most interested in Trincomalee and the North. We cannot progress without taking this into consideration, It’s like this – it’s not an ‘Indian’ project. The project has to be within our national policy framework, and within that, we should go for an agreement with India.”
Sirasa: What do you mean.. ‘agreement with India..’ – Without calling for tenders?
AKD: At the very least, call for tenders within India
Sirasa: Only within India.. ?
AKD: At the very least, only within India. That’s not how it’s done right now, is it? The first option should be, consider if we can do the project ourselves. Second option, can we find a state without links to India or China?
Third option is to do the project, within our policy framework, calling for tenders within India.”
Looking back at agreements entered into with India over the past couple of years however, it’s clear that several projects, some of which included a grant component, had conditions, requiring that they be implemented only by Indian companies. Some were defence related, like the project for setting up a Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre in SLN headquarters in Colombo, through an agreement with Bharat Electronics – a company under India’s defence ministry. Facing a crippling economic crisis in 2022, and in desperate need of a US$ 1 billion loan for emergency supplies, Sri Lanka was not in a position to negotiate as an equal partner with India. Terms were dictated by the regional hegemon, with its own strategic objectives in this location, that has become a geopolitical flashpoint.
Renewable energy
During this period, India also consolidated its hold on Sri Lanka’s renewable energy sector – to the dismay of the local industry. Among some controversial MoUs signed in March 2022, were the unsolicited wind power projects in Mannar and Pooneryn, approved by the BOI in February last year, to be given to Adani Green Energy Ltd. The CEB chairman (who later resigned) revealed at a COPE hearing in June 2022 that then president Gotabaya Rajapaksa was under pressure from Indian PM Narendra Modi, to give the project to the Adani group. Indian tycoon Gautam Adani is said to be a close associate of the Indian PM.
Scientists and environmental experts have with one voice condemned this project for its ruinous environmental impact. They point out it does not make economic sense either, with purchase price being negotiated in US dollars at many times the market rate, for a 25 year contract period. While it has been suggested that alternative locations with wind power potential could be sought, it is unlikely the Indian side will agree to this, because it is precisely the site’s location that makes it important to them. In 2021, India’s objections led to the suspension of a contract won by China through an ADB-backed competitive bidding process, for a renewable energy project on three islands off Jaffna. India offered a grant to carry out the same project, and an MoU was signed during a visit by Minister Jaishankar, 28-29 March 2022. This contract was signed last month with U-solar Clean Energy Solutions, chosen through a competitive bidding process for Indian firms, conducted by GoSL, according to The Hindu.
Against this backdrop, the JVP leader’s stance that project tenders should be called ‘only within India,’ becomes deeply problematic. Is he saying, that the lop-sided style of project structuring that emerged at the height of the economic crisis, will become a ‘principle’ in the NPP’s programme? Few would dispute his critique of the manner in which governments see-saw between India and China, with corrupt politicians seeking ‘deals’ (on projects) for personal gain. But his position that projects should, as a matter of policy, be given to Indian companies is naïve at best. While he says that a local contractor would be the first option for a project (‘to do the job ourselves’), wouldn’t there be a large project area outside the scope of local expertise, such as in advanced technology? Besides, giving Indian firms preference for important projects would amount to an unquestioning acceptance of Indian strategic calculations. How would the fallout of such a policy affect Sri Lanka’s foreign relations – especially if it claims to be ‘Non-Aligned,’ as NPP ideologues have suggested, in published articles?
Sovereignty concerns
Another problematic MoU signed in 2022 relates to a large INR grant for a Unique Digital Identity (SL-UDI) programme for Sri Lanka, based on the Indian Aadhaar system. At a press briefing on 14.07.23 State Minister of Technology Kanaka Herath announced that tenders had been called for the project, to collect face, eye, fingerprint and ‘several other biometric data’ of all persons, with bidding limited to large Indian companies. The data would be stored in a centralized system, and the government of India would oversee the software development, he said.
Though the JVP/NPP delegation on Feb. 6 visited the Unique Identification Authority of India (that issues the Aadhaar number) it has been silent about this part of its tour. It was Dissanayake who raised concerns over SL-UDI in parliament last year. He is reported to have said his party had no objection to the project, but had concerns over sovereignty and the protection of citizens’ data. The Frontline Socialist Party warned that giving an Indian company access to the population’s biometrics posed a national security threat. However, neither the JVP/NPP nor FSP addressed the risk nearer home, that once the population’s biometric data is collected by government in a centralized, state-controlled database, it could potentially be used for mass surveillance of the citizenry.
While government statements vaguely suggest this project will ‘modernize’ Sri Lanka and make the delivery of state services more efficient, there is a worrying lack of public awareness and debate on the issues surrounding the introduction of such a scheme. For example privacy concerns have not been addressed, nor the question of whether the UDI will be mandatory in order to get welfare benefits and other state services. In India the Aadhaar scheme has been the subject of many supreme court rulings on issues raised by civil liberties groups. The European Parliament in October 2021 voted to back a total ban on biometric surveillance, in accordance with a report from a parliamentary committee on civil liberties.
The Sri Lankan UDI project has been dogged by controversy from the outset. When State Minister Herath announced the call for tenders, he indicated that the software systems would be ‘installed under the full supervision of the Information and Communication Technology Agency of Sri Lanka (ICTA).’ Within days of his press briefing the Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprise (COPE) exposed bigtime fraud and corruption at ICTA. Three months later AKD alleged in parliament that the tender process had been manipulated to the advantage of a particular company. The two Indian companies that bid for the contract have since then been reportedly disqualified.
As an opposition party, the JVP has often called out corruption in government. With elections on the cards, if it has set its sights on coming to power, it will have to live up to expectations of voters accustomed to its anti-corruption rhetoric and demands for transparency etc while in opposition. How will it navigate issues surrounding the ongoing Indian projects? It has been conspicuously silent on the subject. With regard to ‘Amul’s plans to buy NLDB and Milco’ however, Dissanayake told Sirasa, they had clearly expressed their opposition, and would protect the local industry.
The question arises as to whether the Indian side sought assurances that their plans would not be disrupted, in the event of a significant change in their power status. Was this possibly the thinking behind FSP’s Education Secretary Pubudu Jayagoda’s remarks posted on Youtube, where he asked “Was it a trap that was set to invite the JVP? They have the government party on side, so now they have to get round the opposition”?
