‘Regime Change’ is a popular phrase that denotes a subtle intervention by a foreign power or powers (mostly Western) to change Governments in the developing world. Sometimes this intervention is not so subtle, as seen by the debilitating wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere. The aim is to dislodge Governments which are perceived to be anti-Western and to replace them with regimes that are not hostile to Western interests, if not outright friendly. In fact, it was widely believed that the change of Government in Sri Lanka in 2015 was engineered by certain outside forces.
Sri Lanka occupies a prime geographical position in Asia, right at the centre of East-West shipping lanes. This makes it the cynosure of all eyes in this region. Moreover, Sri Lanka is believed to have oil deposits worth around US$ 250 billion, though it will take several decades to commercially exploit them. Many global and regional players have an interest in the developments in Sri Lanka. A politically and socially unstable Sri Lanka is not in the interests of any of these countries, including India, China and the US.
Hence the great attention paid by all these countries and regional blocs such as the QUAD and BIMSTEC to current political developments in Sri Lanka, which have included the appointment of a new Prime Minister and a new-look Cabinet. Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe is most suitable for this role, being an elder Statesman with long-standing ties to the Western world as well to countries such as India. Even as the ‘Aragalaya’ protest movement continues with the stated aim of sending the entire Government and all 225 Members of Parliament (MPs) home, the Government has been quietly negotiating with a host of countries and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to revive the economy and bring normality back to the lives of the people affected by endless queues for many essentials. Several countries including India have already extended a helping hand.
Nevertheless, certain political parties, academics and others have managed to create an impression in society that no international help would be forthcoming for Sri Lanka as long as President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe remain in power. They say that international help will pour in once they leave office on their own volition or are ousted either democratically or undemocratically. This is a fundamentally flawed analysis of the current status quo. The world, however, does not quite operate this way.
First, the Sri Lankan President and the Government have been duly elected by the people at elections that were deemed to have been free and fair by international observers. The mandate they received is still intact and can only be changed by another round of elections. Any ‘Regime Change’ by any other means is illegal and will not be recognised by the International Community. For example Myanmar, where a military coup replaced the democratically elected administration a couple of years ago, is still being shunned by the International Community.
As for the President, there are only two ways to remove him or her from office (barring own resignation and death) – a Presidential Election and Impeachment Motion. There are 28 more months to go for a Presidential Election and Impeachment is a rather convoluted process that has failed once in Sri Lanka. As for a fresh mandate for the people’s representatives, almost all political parties agree that a General Election should be held, maybe one year down the road, with a possible Interim or All Party Government in the intervening period.
Given these facts, it is highly unlikely that any other country or organisation would be willing to directly or indirectly intervene in Sri Lanka for Regime Change.
On the other hand, many countries have been horrified by the suffering of the people in Sri Lanka and would like to extend assistance. US Ambassador Julie Chung expressed this view succinctly when she said that it is inaccurate that some countries are waiting for a change of Government to offer aid or assistance to Sri Lanka. This is an unequivocal statement that leaves no doubt about how the International Community views the developments in Sri Lanka.
In an interactive session with a group of local journalists at her residence, the ambassador said there had been misinformation that the International Community was holding back aid or assistance at this time of need for Sri Lanka. “I have said the U.S. supports Sri Lanka. Our support is not dependent on who is sitting in the Presidential Chair or the Prime Minister’s Chair”, she said.
However, she stressed the need for good governance, positive reforms that reflect the voices of people, and transparency. Political reforms and economic reforms are intertwined and should go in parallel, she added. She also clarified that the US had not imposed sanctions on third countries obtaining Russian oil, which is important in the context of Sri Lanka trying to obtain oil from that country.
Her categorical statement may have dashed the hopes of those who were aiming for international intervention in Sri Lanka at this stage. While international intervention may sound good on paper, in reality it is harmful in the long run as some of these countries seek to fulfill their hidden agendas through their local proxies.
We necessarily have to find a long-term home-grown or domestic solution to our current woes, even if we welcome short-term international monetary assistance from various donors to tide over the chronic shortages of goods and the general economic downturn. The best solutions to our troubles should still be found within a democratic framework and within our social values.