Indrani Bagchi, TNN | Mar 23, 2012, 12.37AM IST
NEW DELHI: Sri Lanka became the lastest victim of the UPA government's coalition compulsions, as India voted against one of its closest neighbors at the UN Human Rights Council today on alleged human rights violations in a development that may have larger implications.
India's unprecedented move to target a close ally could result in India losing strategic space to China, which voted against the resolution censuring Sri Lanka , along with others in the neighborhood, like Bangladesh and Maldives. All Asian states, except India, stood by Sri Lanka.Kuwait and Saudi Arabia voted with their strategic ally, US.
India went against its own tradition of not voting on country-specific resolutions in the UN, because of the huge pressure put on the Manmohan Singh government by the Tamil parties, with ally DMK even threatening to pull out of the government.
Indian diplomats worked hard to push cucial amendments to ensure that the US-sponsored resolution was less "intrusive" and something Sri Lanka could live with. Notwithstanding this consolation, India's vote against Colombo has sent ripples of dismay through the island country.
India fully expects some retaliation from Sri Lanka - among the first steps, the Indian High Commission in Colombo put out an advisory today asking all Indian citizens in Sri Lanka to report to the Indian mission, in the light of a number of demonstrations against India. Sources however said, India remains the largest investor, largest trade partner and the source for the largest number of tourists in Sri Lanka. The Indian statement also refers to deep-rooted ties with the country.
The PM tried to put a brave face on the decision extracted by parties from Tamil Nadu and which many fear may be exploited by China to expand its influence in Sri Lanka at India's cost. "What we did was in line with our stand. We don't want to infringe on Sri Lanka's sovereignty but our concerns should be expressed so that Tamil people can get justice and lead a life of dignity" Manmohan Singh said.
Lankan sources said they were deeply disappointed with the Indian vote.
In his initial reaction, Sri Lankan foreign minister G.L. Peiris said it was distressing that domestic politics and "strategic alliances" in different countries influenced the vote, a veiled reference to India.
He also highlighted the support that Sri Lanka received at Geneva
"With 15 countries voting with Sri Lanka, and 8 countries abstaining, the final result was that 23 countries, out of a total of 47 members of the Human Rights Council, did not support the Resolution, while 24 supported it. The margin was as narrow as this," Peiris said in a statement.
India had a problem explaining its vote. with its own . In its statement, India openly says that it approves of the recommendations of Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission( LLRC) ,something it had welcomed when they first came out. Further, in a clear thumbs-up to Lanka, India said, "We are confident that implementation of the report will foster genuine reconciliation."
Justifying its vote, though, India went on, "we urge the Sri Lankan Government to take forward the process of broader dialogue and show concrete movement towards a meaningful devolution of powers, including the implementation of the 13th Amendment and beyond. We would also urge that Sri Lanka takes forward the measures for accountability and to promote human rights that it has committed to. It is these steps, more than anything we declare in this Council, which would bring about genuine reconciliation between all the communities of Sri Lanka, including the minority Tamil community."
Earlier this week, Singh committed in parliament that India would vote in favor of the resolution, after which Indian officials launched a massive diplomatic outreach with the US to put in some amendments to the text that could ensure that Lankan sovereignty was not completely compromised. These amendments were reflected in the text, both in the preamble and in paragraph 3, where advice and technical assistance can be offered to Sri Lanka but only with the "concurrence" of Colombo. In an attempt to assuage Colombo's hurt, India said, "we also underline that any assistance from the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights or visits of UN Special Procedures should be in consultation with and with the concurrence of the Sri Lankan Government.... A democratic country like Sri Lanka has to be provided time and space to achieve the objectives of reconciliation and peace."
In fact, India's view has been that in the short time since the war, Sri Lanka has moved further towards reconciliation that many others. Although many here feel political devolution remains a serious problem in Lanka's politics, which might create conditions for a re-emergence of theLTTE, India's take of Colombo's conduct is different from that of US and other sponsors of theGeneva resolution.
Yet, it went for a resolution the resolution slammed Sri Lanka, saying that its internal inquiry report, LLRC does not adequately address "serious allegations" of violations of international law. It asked Colombo to present a comprehensive action plan detailing the steps to implement the recommendations of the LLRC, as well as take technical assistance from the UN High Commisssioner.
India's EoV recalls that India had actually welcomed the LLRC report, and approved of a number of recommendations.
In contrast, China issued a statement on Thursday, supporting Sri Lanka, and criticizing the resolution. The Chinese foreign ministry, in a statement, said, Sri Lanka and its people were capable of dealing with their own affairs. China said, dialogue and cooperation was the best way to solve differences on human rights. China made it clear it would oppose any pressure on Colombo. Instead of complicating the issue with such action, the international community should create a conducive atmosphere to stabilise situation in Sri Lankan, it added. This statement is certain to be more than a balm to Lanka's self-respect at this point
The US-sponsored resolution at the UNHRC, though non-binding, was passed with 24 votes, 15 against and 8 abstentions. China voted against the resolution as did many in India's neighbourhood - Bangladesh and Maldives, as well as Russia, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia andIndonesia. US envoy, Eileen Donahue said, "An enduring peace will be unsustainable without meaningful steps to foster national reconciliation and accountability...We see India's support as nothing but positive."
