{"id":135166,"date":"2014-12-19T11:16:17","date_gmt":"2014-12-19T05:46:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/?p=135166"},"modified":"2014-12-24T00:10:53","modified_gmt":"2014-12-23T18:40:53","slug":"too-much-china-connection","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colombotelegraph.com\/index.php\/too-much-china-connection\/","title":{"rendered":"Too Much China Connection"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Laksiri Fernando<\/span><\/a> –<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"Dr.<\/a>

Dr. Laksiri Fernando<\/p><\/div>\n

Excessive reliance on another is not good for a person or a country. This is exactly what is happening today in Sri Lanka<\/span><\/a>. The repercussions of such a policy will be disastrous for democracy and also the economy. Already the consequences are visible in both spheres.<\/p>\n

\u2018Like getting chillies by giving ginger\u2019 (inguru dila miris gaththa wagai<\/em>) is a common saying in the country. Origins of the proverb goes back to early 17th<\/sup> century when King Rajasinghe II invited the Dutch to defeat the Portuguese and then at the end the Dutch colonised the country. This is also what happened when the British came.<\/p>\n

Of course the Western powers (Portuguese, the Dutch and the British) used force to seek alliances and colonise the country. That was a few centuries ago. It was somewhat in desperation that the Kings or the Nobles sided with \u2018one against the other.\u2019 The colonisation was largely unintentional on the part of the locals (kings or the nobles).<\/p>\n

However today, the submission for virtual colonisation is willingly done, and voluntary on the part of the political leaders. The reasons are so seemingly obvious; money and power. The ordinary people are mere victims of this process. It is a mind boggling question how an Eastern colonisation (Chinese) is better than a Western colonisation (British or American). This is the twenty first century and not the sixteenth or the nineteenth century. Colonisation of all forms and from all quarters are inimical to any country\u2019s independence and wellbeing.<\/p>\n

Ancient Relations\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 <\/strong><\/p>\n

Sri Lanka China<\/span><\/a> relations have a long history. The famous Chinese monk Fa Xian came to the country in the 5th<\/sup> century to study Theravada Buddhism. It was a spiritual venture. There have been further contacts between the two countries, although not very prominent, as Sri Lanka was on the sea lanes of the \u2018silk-road.\u2019 Most prominent among these contacts was Admiral Zheng He\u2019s adventures and confrontations with the Kotte kingdom in early 15th<\/sup> century.<\/p>\n

China those days was looking beyond the usual trade or commerce with other countries perhaps like today. It was the second phase under the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644). It was akin to an initial form of colonisation effort or at least a strategy of \u2018string of pearls\u2019 like today. Zheng He had several voyages via Ceylon and wanted port facilities in Galle and Colombo. The exact history of the confrontation is not clear. However, when Alakeshvara, who was first a military commander\/minister and then the real Kotte ruler broke his promises to the Chinese, he and his entourage\/family were taken prisoner to Nanjing in 1411. According to the Collected Works of Yong Rong (1515), the following was what happened in brief.<\/p>\n

\u201cStraight-away, their dens and hideouts we ravaged,
\nAnd made captive that entire country,
\nBringing back to our august capital,
\nTheir women, children, families and retainers, leaving not one,
\nCleaning out in a single sweep those noxious pests, as if winnowing chaff from grain…
\nThese insignificant worms, deserving to die ten thousand times over, trembling in fear…
\nDid not even merit the punishment of Heaven.
\nThus the august emperor spared their lives,
\nAnd they humbly kowtowed, making crude sounds
\nPraising the sage-like virtue of the imperial Ming ruler.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Undoubtedly there were exaggerations in the description. However, the conflict as a result of either broken promises to the Chinese or because of Chinese over ambitions in Ceylon is true. It is unclear how the colonial ambitions of the Ming Dynasty died down in Greater and South Asia thereafter. If not, Ceylon could have been a colony of the Chinese even before the Portuguese.<\/p>\n

When it comes to colonialism or colonial influence, whether it comes from the West or the East doesn\u2019t make much difference. To overlook this fact might be a terrible mistake in politics.<\/p>\n

Present Dilemma <\/strong><\/p>\n

China Sri Lanka relations have been immensely useful and pleasing after independence. Sri Lanka was one of the first countries to recognize the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) after the revolution in 1949 although formal diplomatic relations started later. The relations became launched with the Rubber-Rice Pact in 1952 in the trading sphere. The relations further bloomed particularly during Sirimavo Bandaranaike\u2019s period.<\/p>\n

A Chinese academic once told me that she was one of the small girls who welcomed Mrs. Bandaranaike<\/span><\/a> with bouquet of flowers in 1972. They undoubtedly had a good impression of her and the country. These also were the days of the Non-Align Movement (NAM). The BMICH in 1975 and the Exhibition and Convention Hall next door to the BMICH in 1998 were outright gifts of the Chinese.<\/p>\n

The times have now undoubtedly changed. China today is more for business than for generosity or mutual relations. There is no question about that, if Sri Lanka is careful enough in these business dealings. It is not directly the Chinese government that deals with Sri Lanka today but some of the major companies and banks, of course under the patronage of the Chinese government.<\/p>\n

Even on Sri Lanka\u2019s part, those who deal with the Chinese companies or governmental corporations are allegedly not the properly appointed government officials or the business leaders, but the political cronies or the intermediaries of the ruling Rajapaksa family. Most damaging has been the bypassing of tender and evaluation procedures. It is equally despicable to hear how some of the ministers (SBD for example) openly defend these deals on the basis of \u2018quick decision making\u2019 or actually \u2018making quick bucks.\u2019<\/p>\n

This writer does not intend to go into the details of these allegedly dubious business deals. Some of them are already exposed in Parliament and in writings of other authors. The purpose of this article is only to highlight the dangers of these business deals in terms of foreign policy (externally) and good governance (internally). However, two of the examples are as follows.<\/p>\n