Shokhin, Or How to Overthink it in Style

Look Elsewhere.

It’s not a huge surprise that the UNHRC adopted the draft resolution tabled by United States, it was so utterly weak and pointless, that even India, an ally with whom we have recently rekindled diplomatic and economic relations chose to take this one on—there’s an adage somewhere about picking the battles you think are worth fighting.  But there are ways that it could have been rendered less useless, less scolding, less diplomatically damaging and humiliating.  The US could have proposed that this document be a positive step towards engaging a regime that is so far on the back foot, playing defensive that we’re now in the locker rooms at half-time having to re-evaluate our game plan because the other team got all the best players.

Why it should infuriate

If the U.S. was sincerely in it to win it, the language used would have been dramatically different—even in its current ineffectual state, the resolution has the potential to humiliate, and if that was the intention, it certainly was achieved.

Neo-colonial scolding, school-marmish Clintonesque foreign policy aside, the language does not promote nor does it propose practical or realistic mechanisms whereby Sri Lanka can foster or achieve a self-determined, sustainable solution.  Also, it’s disingenuous, out of context and completely confusing when out of nowhere comes a nonsense, unnecessary resolution in lieu of broader dialogue and more coherent, strategic foreign policy from the U.S.

The resolution is a four-part take-down 

1. “Taking note of … LLRC … acknowledging its possible contribution to the process of…”

Reads: “… That’s a really cute attempt at reproducing a Boticelli”.  Instead of disparaging attempts at reconciliation, how about acknowledge that an independent commission should work on an extended timeline—not offer up apologies and introspection so fast that we all have whiplash, and second, that it’s working document. Here’s how it could have been improved:

“Understanding that the LLRC report lays groundwork for further investigation and will be vital in developing a blueprint for national integration and reconciliation over agreed timelines.”

2. “Welcoming constructive recommendations… to credibly investigate widespread allegations… [severe, ongoing  human rights violations]”

The people alleging are… Jon Snow? Amnesty International?  M.I.A.?  If you’re going to throw down a litany of misdeeds, be specific—I believe all marriage counselors will concur.  If you’re not going to, then:

“Welcoming constructive recommendations to independently examine national concerns related to integration and social stability in the north of Sri Lanka and recommends that any revised reports LLRC address these specific concerns.”

3. “Noting with concern that the report does not adequately address serious allegations…”

Your Boticelli reproduction actually looks like someone went at the paint jars with their feet.

4. “Requests…  a comprehensive action plan… to address alleged violations of international law… Requests the  Office of the High Commissioner to present a report…”

Reads: “Tell us how you’re going to fix this.  I want it on my desk by Monday.  And we’ll be watching you.”

Should read: “Requests that the GoSL seek any mechanisms and resource within our bilateral agreements, and those of the Office United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rightsat large to develop tangible and effective dispute resolution mechanisms.”

What could happen next:

The nationalist government that wins so big at home is now not held up just to scrutiny (which while irksome, is acceptable), the very fact that key allies like India were left with no choice to vote with such a toothless, pointless resolution, has humiliated the administration which needs economic support from these allies.

1. The India question looms large.  They have too many national interests in our energy resources, potential trade-routes and export economy to be alienated at this juncture.  But their vote will likely set us back diplomatically by a couple of years.  Over the past six months, the administration has continuously laboured to revive our “special relationship”.  Heir apparent Namal Rajapakse was in India just last week currying favour for the vote and while it was largely was cosmetic, it could have been the lipstick on the pig that doesn’t polarize this carefully developed balance with a next-door neighbor.
2. Backfoot. Backfoot. Backfoot.  If you’re not playing offense, you’re playing defense.  And GoSL’s enormous ego will be its ultimate downfall.  I don’t strictly agree with notions of “it’s our problem, stay out of it,”—but I don’t believe that the administration has been left much choice.  Particularly since they’re wondering when the U.S. decided to come to the Sri Lanka party.  Destructive, school-warden diplomacy makes the United States look disengaged and dotty at best, hypocritical at worst and they were told so today
3. Investments withdrawn.  Over the past few weeks, we’ve had a couple of international investments breakdown because they were backed by governments that voted for the US resolution.  That could have meant infrastructure and jobs.  A public shaming of this scale, though non-binding, is not without its impact for more squeamish investors and now GoSL will be forced to put development on the back-burner in favour of repairing its bruised image.

Had the resolution had any real meaning, or if the United States was sincerely interested in developing a relationship, the UN resolution would not have garnered this much attention, it would be a friend telling another friend off, but right now we’ve ended up in marriage counselling without even been taken out for dinner.  We’re also sent scrambling into a pool of private investment goodwill that could quickly dry up.