Atal Bihari Vajpayee Memorial Lecture delivered by Ranil Wickremesinghe

December 28, 2024 at 11:38 AM

It is with great regret that I heard of the passing away of Dr. Manmohan Singh last night.

Let me begin this speech, then, by expressing my condolences to the President, Prime Minister, the members of Dr. Manmohan Singh’s family, and the people of India. His first budget speech as Finance Minister in Mr. Narasimha Rao’s government changed the course of Indian history. 

Without him, there would not have been any economic reforms in India, and without those reforms, there would not have been a modern India. I was privileged to have associated with him during this period.

You have conferred a great honour on me by inviting me to deliver the 7th Atal Bihari Vajpayee Memorial Lecture – a leader with whom I had an association spanning four decades. We must recall that the 25th of December 2024 was also the centenary of his birth.

Despite the age gap between us, our respective careers often intertwined with one another. Over the years, both of us went through many ups and downs in politics. We both held positions as Leaders of the Opposition in our respective legislatures. From 2001 to 2004, we were concurrent Prime Ministers of our two countries. A few years later, he retired from politics, while I soldiered on – eventually to become the President of Sri Lanka, sadly after his demise.

  1. My lecture today is founded on my vantage of India from across the Palk Straits — its leaders, and its contemporary political and economic relations with Sri Lanka — both as an observer and a contributor to the events of the last 50 or so years. My first visit to your country was as a young boy of 18 years to Chennai to sit for the London GCE A-level Examination — as was the prevailing practice in Sri Lanka at the time. I remember vividly that the DMK had just won the Tamil Nadu State Elections, and Annadurai had just taken over.
  2. Though our historical linkages and networks can be tracked back over three millennia, the modern histories of our two countries as nation-states amount to less than two centuries.

In fact, the modern political history of our interlinks can be seen to originate in a meeting between the Indian Hindu monk and philosopher, Swami Vivekananda, and the Ceylonese Buddhist revivalist and writer, Anagarika Dharmapala, during the Chicago World Parliament of Religions in 1893.

My own family’s links with Indian political leaders go back four generations to the Indian self-rule leaders, Gopal Krishna Gokhale and the polymath and writer Rabindranath Tagore. My grandfather and other Sri Lankan leaders of the independence movement met Gokhale during their student days in the UK and often kept in contact with other leaders such as Gandhiji and Pandit Nehru. Our leaders were aware that Ceylon could obtain independence from the British only after the Indian empire ceased to be. Hence, our leaders gave their fullest support to the Indian Freedom Movement’s call for Purna Swaraj. Thus, when India was established as an independent state in 1947, we followed with an Independent Ceylon in 1948.

  1. The first Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was admired by us and immensely respected for his leadership in giving birth to the Republic of India, Bharat — from a grouping of territories and princely states under the British Empire.

Atal Bihari Vajpayeeji had an instinctive understanding of this nation-building exercise and the need to maintain the unity of India’s diverse peoples. His relationship with Panditji Nehru fascinated me, as it contained a high degree of respect for Nehru as a person but a biting criticism of Nehruvian policies. His tribute to Nehru is an outstanding speech, and I quote:

“Bharat Mata has lost a Prince –  

the Leader is gone,  

the followers remain.”

It is in the same vein as the American poet Walt Whitman’s tribute to Abraham Lincoln in the lines:

“O Captain, my Captain!  

Our fearful trip is done…  

But I, with mournful tread,  

Walk the deck,  

My Captain lies,  

Fallen cold and dead.”

  1. My first meeting with Vajpayeeji took place in Colombo when he participated in the Inter-Parliamentary Union Conference in 1974. I attended the meeting as an assistant to Sri Lanka’s Leader of the Opposition, J.R. Jayewardene. Later in the day, I came upon him at the Galle Face Hotel, looking at the sea in deep contemplation, where I was able to have an extended conversation with him.

Unfortunately, I lost contact with Vajpayeeji when Prime Minister Indira Gandhi made him a resident guest of the Indian Government, leading to two years in the shade. However, 1977 was an eventful year for both of us. In March, Vajpayeeji became the Foreign Minister of India, and four months later, I became the Deputy Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka — leading to a renewal of our acquaintance on many occasions from then on.

  1. I have also been an eyewitness to the pivotal and sweeping economic metamorphosis of India from the late 1990s onwards. As you may recall, Sri Lanka was a forerunner in instituting an open economy in South Asia – as far back as in 1977. By 1989, as Minister of Industries, I had brought in the 2nd Generation Economic Reforms in the country, which included Sri Lanka’s Strategy for Industrialization. Not long after, in 1991, India’s first Generation of Economic Reforms were introduced by Prime Minister Narasimha Rao, whom I had known from the early 1980s, since he was my counterpart in India when I was the Minister of Education. When you have been in politics as long as I have, you end up knowing everyone – at some point or the other! To me, Prime Minister Narasimha Rao was a Telangu version of the Italian political strategist, Machiavelli. Because I don’t think he ever anticipated that he would become the Prime Minister of India. However, when he did so – quite accidentally, he took the opportunity to implement his reforms by utilizing a number of cunning ploys and unscrupulous gambits. It was unfortunate then, when his lack of a support base in the party brought him down, and the reform process stagnated.
  2. Prime Minister Vajpayee, on the other hand, dauntlessly managed to initiate the 2nd Generation Economic Reforms in India in 1999. It was ironical that Acharya Kriplani had once called Vajpayee “Nehruvian in the Jana Sangh garb”. Nevertheless, three-and-a-half decades later “Vajpayeeji in BJP garb” took the final steps of dismantling what was left of the Nehruvian Economy. His 2nd Generation reforms were bold — and included capital market liberalization, privatization, and the opening the Telecom industry. As a result, within a decade these two Prime Ministers had paved the way for a promising, vibrant, new Indian Economy.
  3. We considered Vajpayeeji to be a close friend of Sri Lanka. In the dark days of Indo-Lanka relations 1983-1987, President Jayewardene always insisted that our High Commissioner in New Delhi kept Vajpayeeji (who was in the Opposition at the time) updated on the ongoing discussions between Sri Lanka and the Indian Government.
  4. When I became Prime Minister for the second time in December 2001, Sri Lanka was facing a severe political crisis. With the attacks on the main port and airport, vessels and aircrafts stopped calling on Sri Lanka — leading to the economy shutting down. Thus, we had no option but to enter into a ceasefire agreement with the LTTE.
  5. On becoming Prime Minister, I immediately flew to New Delhi and explained the situation to PM Vajpayee — who also agreed on the need for a ceasefire. Moreover, Sri Lanka required the support of India to deter further attacks by the LTTE, and, to get the peace talks on-track. I always kept Vajpayeeji informed of the progression of our discussions with Norway, Japan, and the LTTE – the conglomerate of friendly-nations that spearheaded the peace process. At the very early stages, he told me: “Wickremesinghe, this is also a very sensitive issue in India. I can only be one step ahead of Sonia Gandhi. You explain it to her and convince her. Then I can follow up.” Fortunately, Ms. Sonia Gandhi was partial to resolving the crisis in Sri Lanka and said that – as long as India’s concerns were met, she had no objections.

There were other ways in which we improved Indo-Lanka relations. For instance, whenever I met Vajpayeeji I always conferred on him two large boxes of Sri Lanka’s best handmade chocolates which he loved; though I believe that he was not given access to sweets. Once he presented me with a translation of his poetry, among other gifts.

  1. Our meeting on 25th of December 2001 (his birthday) laid the groundwork for a closer relationship between our two countries. In fact, Vajpayeeji went out of his way to help Sri Lanka. He did so by ensuring that:  

(i) India reiterated its commitment to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka, and  

(ii) its support for the measures taken to carry forward the peace process in Sri Lanka.  

As a result of these discussions, I was able to sign a Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE in January 2002.  

  1. At the time, there was an imminent food shortage in Sri Lanka, and India promised to provide us with 25,000 tons of wheat per month for 12 months. Vajpayeeji and I also discussed two other delicate matters.  

Referring back to discussions between President Jayewardene and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in the 1980s, I too emphasized that the security of our countries should not be compromised in our dealings with one another and with the rest of the world. We also deliberated on developing the abandoned field of oil tanks in Trincomalee – built during World War II. Subsequently, on my way home, when asked for a comment by the Indian media, I replied, “Christmas has come!”  

  1. 2002 and 2003 were crucial years for Indo-Lanka relations. We both agreed that there was a need to strengthen bilateral relations on other fronts as well – especially the economic – since we were at the tail end of the conflict with the LTTE, or so we thought. Vajpayeeji left the details to Brijesh Mishra – his man for all seasons.  

My government covered new areas, especially Trade, Economics, and Investments. All successive governments on both sides used the same format to carry on discussions. Mishra was against terrorism and gave us all possible support — though this was kept under the radar.  

  1. The war against terrorism was at its height in the 2000s, and the next two communiques issued by us highlighted the need to oppose all forms of terrorism – be it political, religious, or ideological – globally.  
  2. The most substantial item here was the reference in the October 2003 communique to the ongoing cooperation in training and supply of equipment to Sri Lanka’s defence forces. Mishra had underscored that our armed forces could not afford any more setbacks.  

Prabhakaran was over-confident regarding the maritime operations of the Sea Tigers. However, in my view, this was the Achilles heel of the LTTE.  

Therefore, Vajpayeeji and I came to an agreement that we would not allow any non-state actors to operate in our territorial waters. The outcome was the cooperation between the two countries to combat terrorism by neutralizing the activity of the Sea Tigers.  

By 2003, the situation had turned to the advantage of Sri Lanka – strategically, economically, and internationally. Prabhakaran knew that he could not gain the upper hand at the peace negotiations. Therefore, he began to boycott the peace talks.  

At this crucial point, India supported us by insisting on a response from the LTTE to the proposals made by the Sri Lankan Government and the early resumption of negotiations. From then onwards, India supported us until the defeat of the LTTE in 2009.  

  1. One topic that Vajpayeeji and I discussed during our Opposition days was the need to go beyond the Free Trade Agreement between India and Sri Lanka and to promote closer Economic Cooperation between the two countries.  

In government, we were able to implement these talks by prioritizing the fields of agriculture, power, and the IT industry. Thus, once the Ceasefire Agreement came into place, our focus turned to the economy. In this too, Vajpayeeji and I were on the same page.  

  1. For the first time then, both governments were committed to liberalizing their economies further. An agreement was reached to set up a Task Force for the FTA and Beyond, which would encompass the service sector.  

When we had our next bilateral meeting in October 2003, the FTA had become a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. We had decided to commence negotiations and conclude discussions by 2004, but by that time, we were both out of office.  

Nevertheless, the two nations went on to promote Indian Tourism in Sri Lanka by increasing Sri Lankan Airlines flights and increasing the daily service by Indian Airlines.  

  1. The two of us took the Indo-Lanka relations to a new level by:  a) firstly, allowing Indian Oil to enter the Sri Lankan market and utilizing the oil tanks in Trincomalee for storage, and  b) secondly, by agreeing to establish a coal power plant in Trincomalee.  

In response to the need to strengthen Indo-Sri Lanka connectivity, we agreed to commission a feasibility study on a land bridge between the southernmost tip of India and the topmost point of Sri Lanka — in order to grant Tamil Nadu with land access to the Colombo and Trincomalee ports. The ultimate aim of this project was to make Sri Lanka a regional and logistical hub.  

  1. In 2015, when I became the Prime Minister again, my peer in India was PM Narendra Modi, whom I had visited in Gujarat some years ago when he was Chief Minister. I remember a visit to Lothal – to the ruins of the old Harappan Fort – which he kindly facilitated.  

During dialogues with PM Modi in September 2015, I referred to his Independence Day speech when he called for the cooperation of SAARC to fight poverty. I briefed the Prime Minister on the progress that we had made with Prime Minister Vajpayee. I also emphasized the need for more balanced trade relations since Sri Lanka’s trade deficit with India was nearly US$4 billion at the time.  

The results of our negotiations were visible when I visited India again in 2017. By that time, we had accelerated talks on an Economic and Technology Comprehensive Agreement – in place of the earlier Comprehensive Partnership Agreement, as the negotiations on economic cooperation had regressed considerably prior to 2015 as the preceding government had second thoughts on the matter.  

  1. In 2017, the two governments also entered into an MOU on Cooperation in Economic Projects under The Agenda for Bilateral Economic Cooperation. These projects embraced:  
  • An LNG Terminal/Floating Storage Regasification Unit in the Western Province of Sri Lanka with a piped gas distribution unit and  
  • Agriculture sector and livestock development.  
  1. The high point in our economic cooperation was a group of projects to develop the Colombo and Trincomalee Ports – to make Sri Lanka into a regional logistics hub. These ambitious plans included:  
  • the Upper Tank Farm in Trincomalee to be developed jointly by Lanka IOC and our Petroleum Corporation (10 tanks) while the Lower Tank Farm was already under Lanka IOC;  
  • a Solar power plant in Trincomalee;  
  • Special Economic Zones in Trincomalee and other identified locations;  
  • a Container Port Terminal in Colombo; and  
  • the development of the Dambulla – Trincomalee Expressway linking the two ports, as well as the Mannar – Trincomalee highway, thereby enhancing our connectivity with India.  

To me, this was the most formidable project for Sri Lanka after the Mahaweli scheme — which delivered hydro-electricity nationally to over 200,000 acres for agriculture in the Dry Zone of the country.  

  1. This MOU was the first significant achievement between our two countries. Until then, there was no substantial arrangement on economic cooperation. Whenever such cooperation was attempted, some of the trade unions and political parties in Sri Lanka opposed it. Even in this instance, the trade unions came out on strike against the Trincomalee Tank Farm proposal. Some of the political parties also called for its abolition. In fact, when Gotabhaya Rajapaksa became President in 2019, these same trade unions who supported President Rajapaksa demanded the cancellation of the Tank Farm deal.  
  2. However, the calamity of Covid-19 and the consequential economic crisis in Sri Lanka showed India at its best. At the most crucial moment when Sri Lanka declared bankruptcy and had only a few hundred million dollars in reserves, India valiantly stepped up to help us.  

The Sri Lankan people could not have survived without the 4 billion US Dollars of financing received from India through various credit lines. It was India’s Neighborhood First Policy – in practice – that benefited Sri Lanka. India was followed by Bangladesh with a loan of US$200 million.  

Furthermore, India, as a Co-Chair of the Official Creditors Committee, gave us valuable help. All this vindicated my stand on closer economic cooperation with India, including improving connectivity in key sectors.  

  1. By then, it was clear to most in Sri Lanka that recovery from bankruptcy and fast growth could be achieved only through closer economic collaboration with India. In July 2023, PM Modi and I announced the “Promoting connectivity, catalyzing prosperity: India-Sri Lanka Partnership Vision.”  

This impressive vision document covered five main subjects:  

  1. a) Maritime connectivity and Air Connectivity – expanding the scope of our earlier agreements.  
  2. b) Trade, Economic and Financial Connectivity – going beyond ETCA – for example, by operationalizing UPI-based digital payments.  
  3. c) Yet, the most important item was Energy and Power Connectivity, where India agreed to assist Sri Lanka to achieve the target of generating 70% of our power requirement from renewable energy sources. This involved the construction of a multi-product petroleum pipeline from South India to Sri Lanka. These projects would result in Sri Lanka being fully connected to the Indian energy system with the ability to bring and sell energy.  

The People-to-People connectivity aspect of the joint statement included education and a feasibility study on the land bridge between India and Sri Lanka. A part of Sri Lanka’s media had been critical of this agreement, saying that we had given too much to India. But a welcome development was the support from the SLPP (Mahinda Rajapaksa’s party), who, by this time, was part of my government.  

  1. The next important development is the Joint Statement of 16th December 2024, issued after talks between President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Prime Minister Modi, titled “Fostering Partnerships for a Shared Future.” With this, it seems like the remaining major political party in Sri Lanka, the NPP, has come aboard. At long last, a political consensus has emerged amongst us on Indo-Lanka Cooperation.  
  2. The two Indo-Lanka Partnership Visions establish the framework of a bilateral economic partnership based on connectivity — a follow-up to the IMF stabilization program. The 2024 statement is explicit on the aim of moving Sri Lanka away from a debt-driven economic model. For two decades, Sri Lanka’s economy had relied heavily on excessive debts — culminating in bankruptcy and the economic meltdown. Therefore, the strategy in these statements is to enhance Sri Lanka’s economic development by coupling our economic recovery to India’s sustained and swift economic growth and technological advancement. It is expected that by 2040, India would be the third-largest economic power in the world. By then, Tamil Nadu’s GDP would have reached US$1 trillion. This is the powerhouse to which Sri Lanka has to connect as a nation.  

All this will establish larger markets for Sri Lankan exports and create two new economic sectors which are expected to be fast-growing:  

1) Energy connectivity – establishing grid interconnectivity — thereby enabling Sri Lanka’s potential for surplus renewable energy to engage in trading with India and Bangladesh.  

2) Maritime and air connectivity – in addition to India as a global economic power, Indonesia will also be among the top 10 in time to come with Bangladesh following closely behind (if all goes well).  

This will lead to an explosion of trade in the Bay of Bengal area. As noted before, if Sri Lanka positions itself as a regional logistic hub, we can become a beneficiary of these developments in the region.  

Thus, the two governments must finalize the outstanding issues of the strategy within a short time frame and agree on the modalities to implement these proposals.  

Today, it is only fitting that we witnessed the conclusion of the talks on economic cooperation on Vajpayeeji’s birth century.  

Thank you.