Peaceful Intervention in Intra-State Conflicts

Norwegian Involvement in the Sri Lankan Peace Process

Chanaka Talpahewa

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781472445353
• eBook ISBN: 9781317082712
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Asian History
• Index: Politics & International Relations

Have we reached an end to the era of peaceful third party intervention in conflict management and resolution? In the 1990s, with the ending of the Cold War, the intervention of third parties as a non-violent means of negotiating settlements of intra-state conflicts gained prominence but the emphasis in the twenty-first century has been increasingly on military responses. Peaceful Intervention in Intra-State Conflicts: Norwegian Involvement in the Sri Lankan Peace Process is an in-depth, impartial discussion on the background, decision making processes and procedures and related actions in the Norwegian facilitated peace process in Sri Lanka that gradually shifted towards a military solution. It provides the reader with evidence based comprehensive analysis on the attempts of peaceful third party intervention in a complex ethno-separatist intra-state conflict.

Chapter 1
Introduction

The four-decade-long conflict in Sri Lanka is a poignant chronicle. Despite many attempted negotiations, culminating in the involvement of Norway with the consent of the two main conflicting parties in facilitating a negotiated settlement, the conflict was terminated only through aggressive military intervention. Thus, the Sri Lankan conflict casts doubt on the viability of the application of non-violent methods to negotiate solutions to intra-state conflicts. The result of the Sri Lankan conflict questions the 1990s’ optimism about the peaceful involvement of third parties in conflict resolution. Instead, it became a part of the reality of the first decade of the new millennium, where the emphasis is on military responses. This makes the study of the conflict resolution efforts in Sri Lanka highly relevant: as a case of the failure of negotiated settlement and third party facilitation.

Norwegian facilitation in the conflict in Sri Lanka provides an excellent example of third party involvement in a protracted intra-state conflict that was complicated by ethnic manipulation. The conflict spanned almost four decades, from the mid-1970s to 2009, with armed non-state actors, mainly the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), waging an armed struggle against successive Sri Lankan governments. It was described as a conflict in which ‘one of the most dangerous and deadliest extremist organisations’ in the world fought one of the oldest pluralistic democracies in Asia, with the intention of creating a monolithic separate state called ‘Eelam’ based on ethnicity.¹ The conflict was more complex and more intense than many contemporary intra-state conflicts. According to Young it was one of the more intractable wars in the post-colonial era.² The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Philipson termed the conflict the ‘No Mercy War’.³

Historical Introduction to Sri Lanka and the Conflict

Sri Lanka is an island nation situated at the southern tip of the Indian subcontinent and has the distinction of being one of the few modern states which has remained a distinct sovereign entity for over 2,000 years. It is a country steeped in history, with the great chronicle Mahawansa, its companion Chulawansa and another reputed chronicle, Deepawansa, providing a written history dating back two and a half millennia.⁴ While others consider these chronicles the irrefutable reconstruction of the early history of the country, some believe that a civilisation existed some five millennia ago, with a legendary ruler, King Ravana, who is depicted as epitomising its zenith. The ancient Sanskrit poetic epic Ramayana is also credited with providing details of this advanced civilisation.

From the time of ancient kingdoms of Anuradapura and Polonnaruwa situated in the north central part of the island, natural calamities and invasions, mainly from South India, meant that over time, the capital of the country had to be moved to the south and to the west and, in later periods, to the central hills. This resulted in the breakdown of the ancient civilisation, which was famed for its hydraulic works.⁵ With the decline of the ancient kingdoms and the fragmentation of the Sri Lankan polity, the country was susceptible to incursions and invasions by Western maritime powers. The Portuguese, the Dutch and the British successively ruled the maritime regions from the fifteenth to the nineteenth centuries. The European powers’ quest for political and commercial footholds in the country resulted in intermittent conflicts with local kingdoms.⁶ These conflicts culminated in the struggle against the Kandyan Kingdom, which withstood successive invasions until in 1815 the Kingdom of Kandy, the last bastion of the Sri Lankan kings, was ceded to the British through a convention. As a result of the Kandyan Convention the island country that had withstood foreign rule for over 2,000 years succumbed and did not regain independence until 1948.⁷

British rule lasted almost 150 years and was the first real experience of foreign rule over the entirety of the island. A fair verdict on British rule would be that while, like all alien regimes, it had its drawbacks and negative effects, especially on the prevailing economy, local traditions and culture, and on the established social structure, these were offset to some extent by positive contributions on the political side which were, primarily, the peace which the British regime brought, the administrative unification of the country, political experience in the development of parliamentary institutions, the rule of law, the growth of a commercial economy, albeit a dependent one, the establishment of vernacular schools and the creation of a Western-educated intelligentsia through the teaching of English, which prepared the country for independence when it came.

In 1931 universal franchise was introduced to the country and the State Council was established. This paved the way for the people to elect their representatives to the decision-making body and can also be considered as the first stage in preparing the country for transfer of power. It was presumably the political maturity which those early leaders showed that led to the bloodless and friendly transfer of power in 1948, unlike what was witnessed in neighbouring countries. Thus Sri Lanka was granted autonomous Dominion status, with the king (or the queen as the case may be) of the United Kingdom (UK), who was symbolically represented by the Governor General, being considered Head of State, while the Prime Minister as the Head of Government, together with the Cabinet of Ministers, attended to the day-to-day running of the country.

When discussing the historical background of the country in relation to the conflict and the involvement of a third party, it is also important to briefly focus on two aspects. First is Sri Lanka’s foreign policy. This is considered mainly because Sri Lanka has always played a role in international politics. Second, political changes resulting from socio-economic issues have to be looked at, as these paved the way for the conflict. The main reason for looking at these two aspects is that the conflict and the international involvement cannot be considered in isolation.

With independence, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy became a matter of paramount importance in view of the sensitive geopolitical situation of the country against the background of the turmoil in the region at that time. The perception of India’s hegemonic intentions and the post-World War II developments also contributed to the shaping of the foreign policy. A further indication of the importance ascribed to foreign policy was the prime minister’s assumption of the portfolio of foreign affairs. Two key elements witnessed in the foreign policy of the newly independent country was the Defence Pact of 1948 with the UK and the attachment to the Commonwealth. These possibly gave Sri Lanka a kind of pro-Western image in the eyes of the world and may have cost it admission to the United Nations (UN) in 1948. The truth probably is that the Cold War was to blame rather than any question of Sri Lanka’s status or image.

Any questions of being pro-West were droppsed when the country entered into the Sri Lanka–China Rubber-Rice Pact in 1952, much to the surprise of many Western nations. Sri Lanka was also instrumental in the launching of the Colombo Powers, in seeming defiance of and competition with the expanding Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO). This step appeared to be the beginning of a turning away from the West, not so much in antagonism, but in order to explore other contacts and relationships that other countries had to offer. That meeting did not go beyond an exchange of views and ideas, though it certainly had an impact on the Geneva Conference on Indo-china of 1954. The meeting of the Colombo Powers had a surprising sequel in that it stage-managed the landmark Bandung Conference of 1955, which gave rise to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961. Sri Lanka was admitted to the UN in 1955.

In the early years after independence Sri Lanka pursued a policy of maintaining an agricultural economy, with industries in a few sectors identified as important set up by the government.⁸ According to Lakshman and Tisdell, about 85 per cent of the people on the eve of independence were living in villages engaged predominantly in agriculture, cottage industries and various traditional service activities.⁹ In the background, where population was increasing, job opportunities were limited and there was rising tension between vernacular and English-speaking sections of society, a landmark political change was witnessed in 1956. The centre-right United National Party (UNP), which had ruled the country since independence, was defeated by the centre-left coalition, Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (the People’s United Front, or MEP) led by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike. This de Silva calls the triumph of linguistic nationalism.¹⁰ Bandaranaike came to power on the platform of making Sinhala the official language. He abrogated the Defence Pact with the UK and entertained notions of leaving the Commonwealth, not as an expression of hostility to the West but because he had a vision of universality as the appropriate foreign policy for Sri Lanka. His policy of universality had another manifestation in his establishment of diplomatic missions in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR, or Soviet Union) and China, thus removing the earlier perception of Sri Lanka not being sympathetic to communism. He also nationalised many important sectors which were in the hands of the private sector such as public (bus) transport and the port services.

The assassination of Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike in 1959 paved the way for his widow, Sirimavo Bandaranaike, to become the prime minister of the country in 1960, making history as the world’s first woman prime minister. She played a key role in the development of the NAM and was an enthusiastic participant at the Conference of Non-Aligned States held in Belgrade in 1961, which is considered as a landmark in the history of Third World identity, and at the follow up conference held in Cairo three years later. During her tenure the nationalisation of the petroleum sector, which was in the hands of multinationals, took place.

In 1972 Sri Lanka adopted a new constitution, becoming a republic. The governor general was replaced by a ceremonial non-executive president appointed by the prime minister. Thus the last colonial link with the UK was severed. Despite maintaining a non-aligned foreign policy, the country was also perceived to be more attached to the Soviet Union and the socialist bloc. During this period Sri Lanka was following policies more oriented towards socialism and established a closed economy. Government interventions and involvement in commerce and the economy, such as price control, goods and product control and government monopolies were witnessed. Due to this, people experienced severe economic hardships.

The political change in 1977 brought UNP back into power with a five-sixths majority. The country witnessed major changes in the political and economic spheres. In 1978 a new constitution was adopted, introducing an executive presidential style of government. Sri Lanka became the first country in South Asia to adopt a free market economy became a focus of foreign direct investment, as well as the initiation of many development projects with the backing of Western countries, which gave the impression that Sri Lanka was pro-West. Further, government intervention and involvement in commerce and industry was reduced and many government ventures were privatised. Since then, successive governments have been supporting an open economy, with slight variations to suit their respective political ideology.

Regular elections and changes of governments did not dispel the tension that had existed between the two main communities since independence. The conflict can be seen as an escalation of this communal tension. The origins of the conflict are attributed to the perceived oppression of and discrimination against the country’s Tamil community. According to an International Crisis Group Report, the failure of successive governments to grant the concessions demanded by the democratic Tamil parties and the frequent suppression of peaceful Tamil protests led to the emergence of small, militant ethnic nationalist groups in the early 1970s.¹¹ This is considered to be the genesis of the Tamil militant struggle. According to Uyangoda, the Tamil separatist struggle entered a phase of protracted civil war in the early 1980s.¹² The 1983 ethnic riots proved to be a turning point in the Tamil militant struggle.¹³ These factors contributed to the conflict being considered an ethnic conflict. According to ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of Figures, Maps, Tables and Annexes
• Acknowledgements
• List of Abbreviations
• Maps of Sri Lanka
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Conflict Background
• 3 Norwegian Involvement: Pre-negotiation Period (1997–2002)
• 4 Negotiations (2002–2006)
• 5 Conclusions
• 6 Postscript: Five Years in Transition – Expectations vs Reality
• Annexes
• Bibliography
• Index