Colombo, December 5 (BW Businessworld): In our Foreign Affairs series, we are focusing on Sri Lanka and the country holds a key strategic location. And to talk about that, BW Businessworld’s Manish Kumar Jha speaks with the Foreign Secretary of Sri Lanka, Admiral Prof. Jayanath Colombage. Foreign Secretary holds enormous experience as a veteran naval commander and this puts him firmly when looked at broadly from the security and defence aspects. Since November last year, he has also been the Foreign Affairs Advisor to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. He speaks on ‘India First’ Policy; Indo Pacific and QUAD in the Indian Ocean Region; Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR); Zero Loan policy of Sri Lanka; Hambantota Port; East Container Terminal (ECT) Project at the Colombo Port; Indian Ocean maritime strategy and Tamil reconciliation.
Q: Foreign Secretary, I begin by asking you geopolitics has changed dramatically post COVID-19 and taken a new dimensional shift. I see a shift of power towards Asia. How Sri Lanka will play its role and be true to its foreign policy of neutrality and strategic autonomy?
A: Thank you for having me in your programme. I have done three training courses in India. And I have been linked with almost all the top-level think tanks in Delhi and Goa. But of course, then COVID-19 came and we could not really interact as much as we would like to. But you mentioned this geostrategic competition after the COVID-19 and of course its stake in place even before COVID-19. So this is an occurrence in Sri Lanka practically on a day-to-day basis. We do see this geostrategic competition unfolding in front of our own eyes practically on a day-to-day basis.
We also see that a few like to use the words “the spheres of influence” of many countries coinciding in this small tiny island in the Indian Ocean, whether it is the Indians, the Chinese, the Japanese, Australians, Americans, Russians, EU and the UK. All these spheres of influence, Sri Lanka is part of because of the geographical location. Now when you talk about the geographical location of Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean, there are key factors you have to remember, one is the centrality of this small island in the Indian Ocean, the second point is the proximity to the busiest shipping lane across the Indian Ocean.
We all know that the Indian Ocean is fast becoming the lifeline of the world. Because they say 72 percent of energy, 50 percent of containers, 35 percent of bulk cargo all carried across the Indian Ocean routes.
And a very important aspect of this is Sri Lanka is geographically close to India. Now India is the biggest country, biggest military power, biggest population, 7,500 Kms of coastline and in 2018, it was the fastest-growing economy in the world and tipped to be the number 3 economy by 2030. So these are the factors, in fact, influencing the defence and trade relations of Sri Lanka. Now in that game, that geostrategic game, how do we survive is a question that we keep asking on a day-to-day basis. And now this geopolitical and geostrategic competition is not really taking place under the carpet, it is now being played in the open. So this is why Sri Lanka has reiterated that we wish to remain neutral in this game.
Of course, technically we are a Non-Aligned country. The non-aligned movement was created after the end of World War II. That was for a different purpose although it is still there. We want to remain neutral because we do not want to be caught up in this power game. We do not want to hedge one power against the other. We do not want to choose one power against the other. We do not want to bandwagon one power against the other. That is not good for a small country like Sri Lanka. And it is our way, we need to maintain power over our own strategic autonomy. We want to maintain relations with every country and at the same time benefit economically to develop the people of Sri Lanka. Now in this game, we do understand India’s strategic security concerns and we need to pay greater attention to that because we have no intention of and we cannot afford to ignore the strategic and security concern of India. So this is a very, very difficult game.
Q: I recall one of your interactions where you said “it is not about this Government, my Government, my being Foreign Secretary for five or ten years. The neutrality of Sri Lanka and the strategic autonomy should remain forever. ” But how is it possible in the geopolitical situation and the change of the Government in Sri Lanka? It has been a flip-flop and shift of policies from one Government to another.
A: We are a democratic country and we love democracy, we do not want to have anything else. We have never had an authoritarian rule, we never had a military dictatorship, so we are quite happy with the democratic system. But then there is the other side of this democratic system because it is short term, and we are divided and we do not want to take risks, why? Because we have short cycles of five years, right?
So every Government which comes to power, first they have to sail through the initial five years, right? So that is why, in the Sri Lankan context, we have not seen long-term visions, long-term development strategies. Unfortunately, we have not seen that. We initially see something for five years and then, of course, it depends on the same Government staying in power whether it may continue or not. And then generally, the opposition in Sri Lanka is always opposing, so their job is basically to oppose and very unfortunately, as you mentioned, every time a Government changes, our policies change, because the people change, people who handle these matters change which is not good for a country like Sri Lanka for its sustainability.
So that is why I have been saying that we need a long-term vision for this country, not limiting it to the five year democratic cycle. Democracy sustains but still there are certain aspects we need to understand which are not favouring the development of the country.
Q: You have been emphatic on ‘India First’ foreign policy. In fact, after taking oaths as the foreign secretary, you said President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s foreign policy will be India First in the region. Was there a missing link in the Indo-Sri Lanka bilateral relation and that led you to announce? How will it unfold in the bilateral relations in the defence and security in the region?
A: You see I was basically echoing the thinking of the President and the Government. Our President, when he visited India after assuming office, said the same thing. And now the Prime Minister, when he visited India, he also said the same thing. We do have to understand India’s strategic security concerns – No. 1. And we should never be a threat to India’s general security and strategic security – No. 2. Sri Lanka is very close to India. We are separated by a narrow strip of the ocean called the Palk Strait and the Gulf of Mannar. Our closest point is 12 nautical miles. That is a very short distance. And if you talk in military terms, if you talk in naval terms, practically within half an hour, you can cross to the other side by water from one country to the other side – crossing the international maritime boundary line is half an hour. And if you take an aircraft, it is less than two minutes.
That means Sri Lanka is pretty much within the Indian maritime security umbrella. Now that is why when Ambassador Shivshankar Menon, when he wrote the book Choices, he said Sri Lanka is an aircraft carrier which is parked 14 nautical miles across the Palk Strait. We do not want to be that aircraft carrier, we do not want anyone to use our country to be a threat to India. Vice versa, we do not want India to use Sri Lanka as well. But then India’s concerns, we have to understand.
If you look at India and Sri Lanka, we have so many things in common – culture, religion, food and dress – we have many things in common, right? So there is no reason why we should say, we do not care about India’s security concern–no, we have to be mindful. And you know, in the past, in history, every time we did not take notice of that, there have been problems.
There has been an impact on the bilateral relations between the two countries. Now the mistrust in such a situation is detrimental to our development, it is detrimental to our bilateral relations. Therefore, the President, the Prime Minister and the Government very keenly understand the importance of India’s strategic security concerns.
Now India is a big country, a big military power, 7,500 Kms of coastline, and a nuclear power. So you have your own security concerns. So we have no right to be a concern to you on that aspect. Therefore we have to be very mindful of that fact. And we should never ever allow another country to use our territory or our territorial waters to be a threat against India. So that is what I meant. I was basically, reemphasizing what the President, the Prime Minister and the Government are thinking at this moment.
Q: How does Sri Lanka look at the concepts of Indo Pacific and Quad? You said Sri Lanka is at the crossroads of both Indo-Pacific as well as (the Chinese) Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). And you also mentioned recently that if it is an inclusive multi-polar world, you are very happy. As a democratic nation, how do you see the difference between BRI and Indo Pacific while many projects under the BRI led to a severe debt problem in many partner countries? You know the Quad held high level operational maritime exercises. Two top-notch warfare assets –Indian aircraft carrier Vikramaditya and Strike Carrier Group from the USA – USS Nimitz– came together including Japan and Australia.
A: As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, Indo-Pacific is too big for us, because even the Indian Ocean is too big for us since we are a small country. But that is not the case with India because India is a big power and your ambitions are not necessarily restricted to the Indian Ocean and they extend to the entire world, so to say, we have no issue with that.
But I would really like to see an Indian Ocean strategy coming up. I mean a strategy designed, developed, agreed by the Indian Ocean littorals mainly through the IORA – Indian Ocean Rim Association, because I feel, as long as we do not have our own narrative, as long as we do not take control of our own destiny, I think we are not doing justice by our people.
So I mean – of course, Indo-Pacific strategy is there, I am saying, in that also India should lead. I mean, IORA we have, IONS we have. But why cannot the Indian Ocean have our own strategy? This is the question I would like to ask everyone. Now, we have Indo-Pacific strategy, we have a free and open Indo-Pacific strategy, we have Belt and Road Initiative, we have Asia-Africa Growth Corridor, we have Bay of Bengal initiative, we have Millennium Cooperation Pact, we have so many strategies coming from outside to the Indian Ocean, right? Now you mentioned about the Quad. I mean anyone is free to have an alliance. There is nothing to prevent big powers from getting together. But then why do we need Quad in the Indian Ocean? Top players, India, Japan, America and Australia, is it purely to counter China? Is Quad and Malabar one and the same? You mentioned the big exercise, I say India has the right to do any military exercise with any country. That is not an issue. And so countries can get together but what is the ultimate objective of this? Now, I remember hearing these words, especially from Indian strategists, “it should be an I-Quad, an inclusive Quad”. So, what I would wish to see is inclusivity in the Indian Ocean, not exclusivity.
This small country in 1971 proposed that the Indian Ocean should be one of peace and everyone agreed at that time because it was ratified by the United Nations. There were three things we did not want – 1. Nuclearisation of the Indian Ocean, 2. Militarization of the Indian Ocean, i.e. to have bases, 3. Using these bases to fight against the others, which was in 1971. Now fast track 49 years, we cannot have the same nowhere because the Indian Ocean, I mean India and Pakistan are both nuclear nations and your neighbour China is also a nuclear nation, so we cannot have denuclearization. And demilitarization is not possible, right? Bases, whoever is having, they are going to have it, so in this sense, at least how we prevent further militarization of the Indian Ocean is something that we should really look at. So in that sense, other than the four major powers or the pillar countries in the Quad, have this fear.
We are not rich countries. We are all developing countries. We have a certain level of poverty in our societies. We need roads, clinics, ports, airports, but if we are not, I mean rather than spending money on that, if we get on with an unnecessary arms race and spend that much money on that, I think we are not doing justice to our people. Now, most of the countries are at least 70 years after gaining independence, right? Have we done justice to our people? This is a question we must ask. Have we done justice to the people, to uplift them from where they are? And when I look around in Sri Lanka, I think we have not done justice.
Now, let me do a very brief comparison. Now you asked this from me, Indo-Pacific and the Belt and Road Initiative. Now, if you ask Sri Lanka and I think I am sharing the views of many countries in the region, how do you prepare the Indo-Pacific strategy, for a free and open, rules-based maritime order. Do not we all want that? We want it 100 percent, right? But then let us shift quickly to the Belt and Road Initiative. Let’s not get into politics. Belt and Road Initiative as they proclaim is an infrastructure, development related, maritime trade oriented network. Now we want that, right? So we want the good of both. We want the good of both without getting bandwagoning with anyone. So this is a predicament.
Q: BRI- the terms and conditions have caused trouble for the partner countries, including Sri Lanka, while Indo-Pacific is led by democratic countries coming to counter such engagement with transparency. You talk about infrastructural development. I understand the Indo-Pacific to have similar intentions, similar motives, of infrastructural development in the region. It is of course about the market as well, no doubt about this, but do not you see the inherent differences in these two concepts?
A: No, I mean as I said I do not want to get into the politics of it because these are perceptions, these are arguments and counter-arguments. But let me reiterate one small fact. The Asian Development Bank released a report and they say from 2020 to 2030 this region needs US$ 16 trillion for infrastructure development. Now, you tell me where this money can come, not only to Sri Lanka, to all the countries, right? Can these democratic countries provide that kind of money to develop the infrastructure of other countries? Now that is an issue of capacities and capabilities. There is a gap, right? Now can India provide everything to the whole region, you cannot. You have to develop your own country. You have to look after your people. You have to develop ports. You do support greatly to other countries, but you cannot take the burden of the entire region. You have to develop ‘India First’, nothing wrong in that. Then of course now you have that ‘neighborhood first’ policy.
For whose benefit? For whose sake? What is the point if we have a very beautiful Indo-Pacific region, free and open Indo-Pacific region, rules-based. But if we are not becoming a part of the global supply chain and if we are not benefiting from maritime trade, what is the use? So we need to balance the two. We need to balance the two, rather than work together, that is our vision. To all the major players – I will quote Joe Biden in his victory speech. He said something beautifully, it really caught my eyes.
He said “we can be opponents, but we do not have to be enemies”. But then as long as the major powers are fighting for influence in this region, smaller countries like Sri Lanka will continue to suffer, right? So what we need is not big powers to fight, but support us. Now we do not want loans.
You mentioned that some projects coming through loans may not be on favourable terms. We should be educated enough, experienced enough countries to smell a rat. If there is something foul, we should be bright enough rather than blaming somebody. Nothing is free in this world. You get something, you have to give something. So you have to be smart enough. Any recipient country should be smart enough not to be caught in a trap. So that is what we want. We want a free and open Indo-Pacific strategy, free and open Indian Ocean, but free trade and more trade. We want to benefit from that, we want to benefit from the location we are sitting, on top of the global shipping network.
Now, we do not see, unfortunately, that much investment coming from everywhere, right? Now take the case of Sri Lanka, in 2009, the war ended. Who actually came to support us – India – one big country, one big supporter – building railway tracks, clearing harbours, clearing millions of mines, building 50,000 houses, India came forward. Japan, they were and they continue to support. Who else came really? Only China. That was 2009. Now today we are living in 2020, 11 years past, do we have any other offer – not much? I mean I always say India did a great thing. But I am saying, big money, big investment, we did not have, we did not have many choices. Now, if we did not take what China offered, we would be still the same as 2009. So this is the reality on the ground. We need to be people-centric.
Q: The economy plays a major role in foreign policies. A growth led environment in Sri Lanka is equally better for India. The Sri Lanka debt crisis is well debated as the overwhelming ‘loan culture’. Knowing the tight fiscal situation in Sri Lanka, what is the way out for economic development for Sri Lanka?
A: That is a question we all need to find answers. Sri Lanka’s debt to GDP ratio is as high as 86 percent. That means if we earned from the dollars, we have to pay US$ 86 back to some other loan. So as high as 86 percent, it is changing and it is a very high figure for a developing country, right? Money that can be used to develop hospitals, roads, water, sanitation, we have to pay in the pans we have taken. Now we have this policy, we take loans. We take loans to pay other loans. We take loans to develop the country and we say that is development. But that is not real development, right? Gradually, we stand into a huge mess, right?
We have to pay the loans, we have to pay the interest and we are not making money out of it. So right now, that is why this Government has a policy, zero loans. No more loans for Sri Lanka. That is a very strong policy, right? But what can we do with the loans we have already taken, we have to honour them, we have to repay them and that is why we have asked India for a debt moratorium and we have requested the World Bank, IMF, ADB, bilateral lenders like China to give us a moratorium for debt repayment.
Because we need breathing space and COVID-19 has made matters worse. You know our income, of course, maintains some high level but then tourism is gone, near zero. So we are going to have a problem. And we do not want to add to that problem and allow it to be carried to the next Government whenever they come to power, or pass it on to the people who are not even born yet.
People talk about Hambantota Port. We have taken a loan to build the port and then with the change of Government in 2015, what happened? They stopped the work of the port. They stopped bunkering, right? And then what happened, they negatively branded it as the biggest swimming pool in the world, right? That is not the way to promote your own port, when I say your own port I mean the country’s port. Instead of doing that they should have finished with the balance portion of the work, brought cranes, brought ships and started making money. So this is the problem that we are caught in the democratic cycle.
So you repeatedly said democracy is doing this and that, well, there are other sides to the democratic cycle as well. So what we need is the ability but we need plans, we need infrastructural development, we need Foreign Direct Investment, no more loans.
Q: Sri Lanka has asked India for a further cash-swap arrangement of US$ 1 billion and PM Mahinda Rajapaksa also mentioned about the pending request for a three-year moratorium on the US$ 900-million debt owed to India. What is the status and expectation from India?
A: Well I do not know exactly but I – we are hopeful that India will be, as always they have done to support. India has never been like demanding us to repay or demanding things. They have been a really good neighbour. You understand your small neighbour and you do not really force upon the neighbour. I am sure India has their own way of doing things. You cannot just expect the moment we ask, “oh yes, we will give you a moratorium”, we cannot expect that. You also have your own issues to handle, you have your own bureaucracy mechanism. So maybe finally it will come through.
Q: But India will definitely help Sri Lanka. You see even during the COVID-19, India sent, I think, at least two planeloads of essentials, medicines to Sri Lanka, free. So India has been there to support you during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A: If you look at the number of tourists coming to Sri Lanka, the top is the Indian tourists. So we want that to happen again. We want Indian tourists to come. We have many things in common. We have the religious circuits, you know you can crisscross and – so things will happen. The moment the COVID-19 is over and I think India will be a strength to Sri Lanka.
I think India has a strong leader and also in Sri Lanka. I think they do understand each other very well and their chemistry is perfect and also I have to be honest and say that we like to see a strong Central Government in Delhi. We do not like to see a Government which is dependent on the regional political parties, so we are quite happy, the mandate the BJP has got. And I think we have been very comfortable with the BJP leadership.
So these policies are meant to enhance the power but of course when you say ‘Neighbourhood First’ now, you say ‘Neighbourhood minus 1 First’ you know. You know what I mean, well that is not our problem, and Pakistan is also a country which has supported Sri Lanka.
So in that sense, we do not want to take any sides between what is happening. It is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan to be solved. We wish that you know, it is going on for six-seven decades now, seven decades plus, solutions will be found mutually and that would really benefit because it is difficult in this world to rise individually as a country, but it is easier to rise as a region. Now, I mean, we can argue whether the European Union is a success or not, but they rose together. But we can argue the ASEAN is a success – 10 different countries with 10 different philosophies with 10 different issues, but they are working together for a common issue. But look at South Asia, such a small gathering, so many commonalities but we are not together, unfortunately, we at least must rise as a region as [envisioned in] SAGAR.
Q: I will bring you back to the economic aspect of the relationship. You have been very vocal of the ‘India First’ policies but there seems to be a pause as no final decision is taken on the East Container Terminal (ECT) Project at the Colombo Port initiated in 2019. Is Sri Lanka firm on the ECT Project? What is your take on delays?
A: I have to tell you we have wasted five long years, not utilising the East Container Terminal of Sri Lanka. It is 600 metres of built and huge area unused for the last five years because of what you are saying indecision. So it has already cost us millions and millions of dollars. Now the Government is very determined to move ahead and to honour the commitments previous Governments made. So usually a new Government would say that since it was done in the past we are not going to honour but no, this President has said: “I will honour that commitment because it relates to India, right?”
Now, we all know the Colombo Port has risen to the 18 best connected container ports in the world this year. And through the port, about 38 percent of containers we handle are from India. So I mean that is a large number. Proportionately huge chunk of containers is from India. So naturally, India should be given to operating the East Container Terminal and we have agreed. You know if the decisions are made based on economics, things are different. But when the decisions were made in order to strategically off balance, that is where it goes from. India is a democratic country, Sri Lanka is a democratic country, people have their own voice. People have their own perception. And the opposition is always inciting opposition from the people. So people in the port are not willing to go ahead with the project, but then they are not the decision makers. Of course, they do not really bother about it or they may not really understand the geostrategic implications. They may think “oh, this is our port, we have an extra-nationalistic feeling that may not work.” But you see, my point is, we have to make this happen. We have to use this port, a 600m berth already built. It is a matter of bringing a crane and getting ships work. It is nearing capacity on the other container jetties. So indecision has cost five long very valuable years to Sri Lanka. We do not have the luxury of waiting any longer. So we have to make our commitment. We have to fulfil our commitment. And true to the word, India should make it happen.
Q: Why not India and Sri Lanka look for a regional maritime partnership and develop a maritime trading bloc? You have mentioned an Indian Ocean led initiative, especially for economic purposes? Can you shed some light?
A: As of now I think our Navy to Navy interaction, Navy to Coast Guard or the Coast Guard to Coast Guard interactions have been of a very high level. They do work together, they do train together, and they operate together. One good example is the recent catching fire of the very large crude carrier MT Diamond. The moment she was on fire, the Sri Lankan Navy being closest rushed to the location, but within hours the Indian Navy, the Indian Coast Guard, Indian military aircraft were on the scene, dousing the fire. And they did it for about a week or so, brought the fire completely under control and made the ship sail. So that relationship is I think excellent, between the two countries’ militaries and there are high-level discussions, we see something like which is pretty much great. And also we have a maritime domain awareness concept between India, Sri Lanka and the Maldives. Now the last time, National Security Advisors of these three countries met was 2014, believe it or not.
We have not even had a National Security Level, National Security Advisor level meeting for the last five years. Now we are determined to make that happen again. We are planning to make the NSAs meet and discuss trilateral cooperation, but expanding our NDA concept maybe towards Mauritius and Seychelles on that side and Bangladesh on the Bay of Bengal so that a larger area of the Indian Ocean will be under the NDA umbrella that we have created a long time back.
There again we have wasted so much of time, imagine the last meeting was in New Delhi in 2014. So we are reviving it very soon, and you will come to hear about it and come out with this collaborative and cooperative mechanism for the Indian Ocean.
Q: You spoke about the EU success model and India, as you said, cannot do everything alone. If it has a partner like Sri Lanka, that would be very viable and sustainable. I was speaking to Admiral Ravindra, who is the former Chief of Defence Staff, and during the discussion it came up, why not India and Sri Lanka build up something like a Corvette together. Do you think such defence collaboration and defence production is possible with India? Also recently, Bangladesh signed for such a collaboration of shipbuilding production with India. What is your take?
A: The last two advanced OPVs built for Sri Lanka were built in the Goa shipyard, so we already have defence collaboration. But yes, as you said, we can build the next one in Sri Lanka that would be very desirable if we can do it. Because we need to keep on engaging together, for common good, for common understanding, for common defence. We have to work together as a region. Yes, very much open to that idea.
Q: Could you shed light on resuming the post-civil war reconciliation process with minority ethnic Tamils that appears to have stalled. Does the Government intend to give Tamils a level of autonomy as stipulated in a peace agreement between the two countries?
A: We have to understand reconciliation cannot be enforced, reconciliation has to evolve through the society. Now we cannot forget that 11 years ago, we had a terrible conflict in this country.
A terrible war. Maybe 100,000 people died and our country’s progress was retarded maybe by six decades and infrastructure including ports, railway stations, airports, buildings were all destroyed by terrorists, by terrorism.
Now India also felt the punch. Now look at the 2008 Mumbai attack, it was not very good to the Indian security apparatus. You are suffering from terrorism. So there cannot be a good terrorist and a bad terrorist. Once you are a terrorist, you are always a terrorist – that is what we believe in. We have suffered immensely because of terrorism.
And we do not want to suffer anymore and we do not want to promote terrorism in any form, at least to see the promotion of terrorism in any part of the world. Because this indiscriminate use of violence for political and religious purposes is wrong. So we need to work together. Now of course our threat is different. We have religious fundamentalism or religious extremism in our country. We need to work together sharing information, sharing expertise, sharing the knowledge and mechanisms and working together and get rid of this menace. Your question was not that. Your question was about reconciliation. Let me tell you a Sri Lankan – an average Sri Lankan, they want five things. They want jobs, they want a house, they want good education for their children, they want health facilities and they want security. Now security from being prosecuted because you belong to a different religion, from being persecuted because you belong to a different ethnicity. These are the five basic things a Tamil, a Sinhalese or a Muslim in this country have and want. If you really ask where reconciliation fits into that, it is much, much, much, much lower. So this reconciliation term is actually something that the politicians see especially during an election to win votes. And then you mentioned, are we going to devolve power? Sri Lanka is, I think, maybe smaller than the smallest state in India. Or maybe the same size of Kerala maybe.
No, I mean the size wise, the area wise, we are quite a small area, right? And devolving power is a very sensitive issue here. Now the 1987 Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord is still in place. The 13th Amendment, a majority of the clauses are still in place. We have a Chief Minister, we have a Provincial Council, and we have a Provincial Government. We have funds allocated to the provinces. All that is done. Only two things not done, that is, giving police power and land powers. Those two will never be given to the provinces, we cannot afford to do that.
But then let me ask you a question, did the 13th Amendment achieve its key objectives of bringing peace to the country? No. In 1987, did we achieve peace through the 13th Amendment, the answer is no. Did we achieve the development of the two affected provinces, the answer is no. Categorically the answers to both these questions are no, negative. So we have given powers, what we need is to ensure that we meet the five basic requirements of all Sri Lankans.
Now take the case of the Geneva solution. The Geneva solution said that you have violated human rights, you have done that, you reconcile and that is going against the reconciliation process because that is inside the nationalism of the majority people. Look, these people are trying to take their turns on us. So we are not going to do that. Let us evolve ourselves. Let us come out of the mistrust that we have in our country. Let’s treat each and everyone as your own brother. It is possible in Sri Lanka because we have great religions, Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam – great four religions. So let us use the religion to reconcile, rewrite the social fabric or recreate the social fabric which is torn apart. But not by force, not through coercive action. It has to evolve from us, it has to evolve from within. Then it will be sustainable reconciliation but not through or by force.
END
