Indian Policy and Sri Lanka civil war: A time for Re-Evaluation.

By Sivanendran | South Asian Analysis Group
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

The familiar cartoon of a man perched in a tree, busily cutting off the branch on which he is sitting, provokes varied reactions. Some find it highly amusing; others, recognising perhaps a predicament in which they have occasionally found themselves, can manage only a wry smile. Indian foreign policy mandarins, who must be questioning their own competence in managing the Sri Lankan relationship, must be included in the latter category. The UN expert panel’s report on Sri Lanka’s war crimes hits many buttons at the core of these issues and it has serious implications for the many visits made across the Palk Straits by the Indian foreign policy establishment during this war.

The conflict in Sri Lanka is a sensitive foreign policy issue for any Indian Administration. Since 1983, different Indian administrations have given different degrees of priority to the continuing civil war in Sri Lanka. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was concerned about the condition of the Tamils in Sri Lanka and the consequent flow of Tamil refugees into India driven by the repeated pogroms in the island. She strengthened the Tamils and enabled them to resist their oppression. In this, she was ably supported by Chief Minister M. G. Ramachandran of Tamil Nadu. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi continued with her policies and promoted an interim solution commonly referred to as the Indo Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 and the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution.

Indo Lanka Accord

This was the first international effort to bring peace to Sri Lanka. India virtually imposed this solution on the recalcitrant warring parties. The Accord, brokered primarily by India, sought to end the conflict in Sri Lanka, which had cost thousands of lives and created several thousands of refugees and displaced persons. It set up Sri Lanka’s current political structure of provincial councils with an ethnically-based Northeast "entity" and a weak power sharing arrangement. It resulted in the deployment of Indian Peace Keeping Force, which was charged with providing a secure environment for the implementation of the peace agreement.

But, both the LTTE and the Jayawardene regime were not in sympathy with the objectives of the Accord and in practise they honoured it, in its breach. Although neither India nor Sri Lanka had renounced the Accord, the bloody and complex events that followed the Accord have deposited it at the edge of oblivion. There are many reasons for the failure of the accord and it has to be addressed elsewhere. But suffice to state that, President Premadasa’s agreement with the LTTE to order the Indian troops to be withdrawn from Sri Lanka by the end of December 1989 sealed the fate of that peace process.

Far more important than any resolution to the Sri Lankan conflict, however, remains the strategic relationship between the India and Sri Lanka. Differences in approaches to solving the ethnic problem have opened political fissures in their relationship with both the Tamils and the Sinhala political leaders.

The upshot of all this was, from an Indian perspective, is that India has had enough. Without no political consensus in India or in Sri Lanka for any Indian involvement, which was made worse by the death of Indian soldiers on foreign soil, the whole Sri Lanka policy was in tatters. This was compounded by the assassination of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. After this, India and Indians lost sympathy for the Ealam Tamil cause and had no interest to be engaged again in the National Question threatening Sri Lanka. The killing of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi is stamped on the psyche of the people of India, causing them to maintain a "hands off" approach to the conflict.

The Aftermath

Since Sri Lanka attained independence in 1948, the Tamils have been struggling for over 50 years to gain their fundamental democratic rights. The agitations of the Tamils have sometimes resulted in agreements of some sort described as Banda – Chelva Pact of 1957 and the |Dudley Chelva Pact of 1966. All these pacts were unilaterally abrogated by the Sinhala government. So it was no surprise that GOSL conspired to undermine and destroy the Accord which for the first time reached the Statute book and gave a measure of self governance for the Tamil people.

In more than twenty years since the Accord, the Tamil people have been subjected to sharply increased violence and significantly increased deprivation in Sri Lanka, including restricted freedom of movement, resulting in the dramatic increase in the number of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees abroad, and the hundreds of thousands of displaced persons within Sri Lanka.

The Sri Lankan government had made no attempt to promote greater unity in the country since then and there is no progress on reforms of government. All the institutions of a modern democratic state have been corrupted in Sri Lanka and overall there is no effort to create an integrated and stable united Sri Lanka. The reform efforts under the Accord continued to be met by obstructionism or passivity by the Sinhala nationalist parties that control the government at all levels. Some observers assert that the cumbersome governing institutions set up under the Accord are unworkable. But was any attempt made to sincerely implement the accord?

The period between July 1987 and December 1989 is one of the darkest chapters of Sri Lankan Tamils. In 1983 the Tamils of Sri Lanka needed Indian support in order to regain their democratic rights. Although all the militant groups identified the creation of a separate state of Ealam as the most favoured solution, LTTE was stubborn in refusing to accept anything else, even as an interim solution. On the other hand the Government of Sri Lanka did not wish to concede any devolutionary powers for the self governance of the Tamils. The Tamil representatives declared that the basis for any settlement should be based on the four principles they declared at Thimpu in July 1985. Henceforth, Indian government was occupied for more than a year with the task of translating Thimpu principles into concrete results. Their efforts – that is from Thimpu through the Bhandari round of talks to operation Poomalai - resulted in the Indo Lanka Accord and the 13th Amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution. These changes were extracted by a hard negotiation struggle between the Indian and the Sri Lankan governments.

Unfortunately, neither the LTTE nor the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) gave it a chance to work. This peace process was killed in its gestation. Retrospectively, I am sure that the Tamils of the Northeast Sri Lanka and the Sinhalese from South Sri Lanka must be regretting that they did not even give the process of the Accord a chance. This process might have brought peace in 1987 and spared the death and destruction in both the communities. This was the best possible deal for a beleaguered Tamil population at that time, and could have provided some foundation for their self governance, provided all parties implemented the accord in accordance with its spirit. Alas, that was not to be. Neither the LTTE nor the Premadasa government wanted the Northeast Provincial government to succeed. The narrow ambitions of the LTTE and the short-sightedness of a chauvinistic Sinhala leadership sought to subvert the spirit of the Accord until it was truly buried without trace.

Finally, all Sri Lankan leaders both Sinhala and Tamil seem bereft of vision -- vision inspired by our most basic principles. Sinhala leaders, and their political class, seem unable to look beyond tactical considerations and short-term needs. They have little tolerance for others in their society and, at the end of the day, little confidence in themselves.

Indo-Sri Lankan relationship since Accord

With the withdrawal of the IPKF mission, India’s leverage to influence Sri Lankan affairs declined. With its negative experience of the peace process India also became a passive onlooker of the affairs in the island. As the island began to get bogged down in a protracted civil war successive Indian administrations began to move away from their active involvement with the National Question in Sri Lanka and prioritised other parallel objectives such as the development of closer ties with Sri Lanka on economic, commercial, trade and military matters.

The battered Indo-Sri Lanka relationship was repaired during President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s administration. But the civil war continued in Sri Lanka requiring additional economic, military and diplomatic inputs. As India kept aloof from the evolving situation in the island other countries such as China, Pakistan, and Iran filled the void. These countries financed and supplied the necessary military hardware to prosecute the war. None of these countries were interested in helping to solve the ethnic problem in Sri Lanka. But they provided the means to end the war. During this period, the divergence of the strategic aims between Delhi and LTTE opened up a wide chasm between India and the Tamils of Sri Lanka.

Another important issue is whether Sri Lanka is still important to Indian interests. Some say that pressing Indian commitments in other countries and regions argue for transferring their attention away from Sri Lanka where progress is painstakingly slow. Others believe that India still has a stake in Sri Lanka’s stability, as part of building an Asia "whole, prosperous and free," the overarching Indian objective in the region. They say continued Indian involvement in Sri Lanka may be needed to arrest its decline, as well as to make sure that it is not used as a haven for organized crime or by adventurists.

India and the War

During the last stages of the war, the rest of the world stood by idly while the Tamils of Sri Lanka were murdered, thrown into concentration camps and ethnically cleansed in thousands. This disgraceful passivity in the face of atrocities of WW II imagery occurred in the immediate aftermath Rwanda and Bosnia. History now is repeating itself. Innocent Tamil civilians were subjected to death by a thousand cuts similar to what was the fate of Sarajevo's citizens by the state forces and the paramilitaries. The Tamil areas are now being cleansed. Opponents of the regime in Sri Lanka are suffering systematic abuse across the country. Mullivaikal seems destined to be cast as Srebrenica in this recasting of the Bosnian tragic drama.

Some things are different. For one thing, the cluttered diplomatic field in Sri Lanka included the United Nations, the European Union in cameo roles. The Indian foreign policy establishment consisting of External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee, Foreign Secretary Shiva Shankar Menon and National Security Advisor Mr Narayanan were constant visitors to Sri Lanka during this phase. There is no game of organizational pass the hot potato to excuse negligent behaviour. The UN, West's and India’s high blown rhetoric ("terrorism must be wiped out" – George Bush) was out of sync with a pusillanimous policy of restricted assistance to those very victims who have been explicitly identified as justifying and requiring immediate assistance. Many excuses are offered, but they all supported the Sri Lankan state’s violence against the Tamils, but taken together they cannot explain the Alliance's failure to do what it is committed to do, that is to protect humanity, and which it is obviously capable of doing. Therein lays the problem.

What was India’s foreign policy objective?

In retrospect the evidence that is available after the war and the UN Expert panel report raises many questions about the dynamics of some of the players in the war. India being the neighbouring regional power has a measure of responsibility to bring order into region in chaos. In this respect it is legitimate in asking what the role of India in this war was. There were a large number of meetings between India and the Sri Lankans directly involved in prosecuting the war. Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapakse acknowledged repeatedly, that the Indian contribution for the war was significant, Further, a week after the defeat of the LTTE, India helped to marshal the members of the UN Human Rights council in May 2009 to pass a deeply flawed resolution ignoring calls for an international investigation into the alleged abuses during the fighting and other pressing human rights concerns. "The Human Rights Council did not even express its concern for the hundreds of thousands of people facing indefinite detention in government camps," said Juliette de Rivero, Geneva advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "The council ignored urgent needs and wasted an important chance to promote human rights."

In the circumstances a lot of questions spring to my mind. Was protecting Sri Lankan Tamils a policy objective of India consistent with the policies under the regimes of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Prime Minister Rajeev Gandhi? The report of the Secretary General’s expert panel on Sri Lanka, discloses a shocking state of affairs in Sri Lanka during this period. Was India aware of these horrors? If not, why not? Whilst the Sri Lankan forces marched on to Mullivaikal unimpeded the military vowed to rout them out like rats. Were any concerns expressed to the Sri Lankans about the innocent victims and assurances obtained? Were the Indians deceived by the Rajapakse’s? Did they make any desperate appeals to the Sri Lankans to stop the slaughter of the innocents? Did the Indians just believe all the assurances given by Rajapakse or did they subsequently monitor the regimes behaviour. Or do the Indians plead an inability to halt the assaults on the besieged people shielded by a sovereign state? Did they issue any warnings to the Sri Lankans of inappropriate behaviour by a member belonging to the comity of nations?

Policy Re-evaluation

This feckless performance is all the more unacceptable given the context of the history of involvement in this ethnic dispute. The outcome of this international concern is unclear. All that can be said is that Indian policy during this period will be scrupulously scrutinised. India will have to live with its effects for some years to come. Sri Lankans are themselves uneasy about what the future holds. The equivocation that has marked their response to the unforeseen upheaval is not contained. It can be said for sure that Indian policy on Sri Lanka also cannot return to the status quo ante. It needs re-evaluation.

© SAAG

Read More

Summary only

India to finance major harbour project in Sri Lanka

IANS | AOL News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

India will financially assist Sri Lanka to develop Northern Jaffna peninsula's biggest harbour that will facilitate the transportation of goods from nearby Indian ports, said a Sri Lankan official here.

The Indian government has agreed to provide financial assistance to develop Kankasanthurai (KKS) Harbour in two phases.KKS harbour is one of the 10 sea and air entry points to the country.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who holds the finance portfolio, had presented the proposal for KKS Harbour Development to the cabinet.

Sri Lanka High Commission's Minister-Counsellor Sugeeswara Senadhira said the cabinet of ministers gave the green signal to the KKS Harbour Development Project last week.

The project, to be carried out in two phases, will involve repairs to the existing breakwater, jetty and deepening of the harbour. A new breakwater will also be constructed.

'A Memorandum of Understanding with the Indian government to carry out the development of the port is to be signed shortly,' Senadhira told IANS.

The harbour's development will enable economic and social development of the war-torn North.

Authorities said the development of KKS harbour will facilitate the transportation of goods from nearby Indian ports.

During the armed conflict between the government forces and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) that lasted more than 20 years, infrastructure development in the LTTE-controlled areas remained stalled and existing infrastructures were damaged.

After the conflict came to an end in May 2009, the government started major reconstruction programmes in the North and the East. India is funding some of the projects.

© Indo Asian News Service

Read More

Summary only

Indian railway project in Sri Lanka in full steam

By R. K. Radhakrishnan | The Hindu
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

With an Indian de-mining team clearing the 107-km stretch of a railway alignment from Medawachchiya to Talaimannar in record time, the Indian Railway Construction Corporation (Ircon) has shifted gears on the construction of a railway line. Ircon is aiming to complete the sections allocated to it in a year-and-a-half.

When the ISO-certified de-mining team, Horizon, began its work about eight months ago, it faced a host of obstacles. “We did not know where the alignment was,” said Shashikant Pitre, chairman, Horizon Group. The LTTE had destroyed the alignment and bridges and had taken away the railway track. “The ground was heavily compacted with gravel making the raking to a depth of 15 cm quite difficult,” he added.

This was not the only problem. Over the years, there has been heavy water logging in some of the areas and there were metal remnants all over the alignment. “The presence of metals in such large quantities meant that we will not be able to make use of metal detectors,” said Mr. Pitre, who retired as a Major-General from the Indian Army.

There were other problems too. All the bridges, major and minor, had been destroyed. This often meant long detours. “We faced serious logistical problems in the transport of people and heavy equipment,” said Anil Srivastava, Horizon Project Manager in Sri Lanka. The actual de-mining took only 25 per cent of the eight months. “From this you can understand how big and serious the logistical problems were. The remaining time was spent on surveys, clearance and marking,” added Mr. Srivastava, a former Colonel with the Indian Army.

As per the contract, Horizon cleared 15 metres from a delineated centre line to either side. In places where stations have been planned this distance goes up to 50 metres clearance. The team said there were only three major confirmed hazard areas, totalling 18,000 square metres. One was between Cheddikulam and Madhu, another between Madhu and Manakkulam and a third between Manakkulam and Mannar.

Horizon, established in 2001 by a few retired Indian Army officers, has been working in Sri Lanka since 2003. So far it has cleared an area of 96 sq.km. and released a total area of 456 sq.km. for rehabilitation. In the process, it has recovered a total of 1,00,444 devices, comprising 44,000 mines and UXOs (unexploded ordnance).

There are two Indian de-mining teams operating in Sri Lanka. The larger of the two, Sarvatra, has so far released a land area close to 1,300 sq.km. in the districts of Mannar, Mullativu and Batticaloa.

During 2010 Sarvatra also cleared almost three times as much as its nearest civil demining rival, the British charitable organisation called MAG.

During 2010 alone, Sarvatra cleared more than four million square metres, destroying more than 40,000 explosive devices, said Brigadier (retired) S.S. Brar, CEO of Sarvatra.

© The Hindu

Read More

Summary only

Sri Lanka war commission seeks term extension

PTI | Zee News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Sri Lanka's reconciliation commission, appointed last year to look into the last seven years of the war with the LTTE, has sought an extension of term to prepare its report.

The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) was set to end its term on May 15 but its spokeperson said that the large amount of evidence it is dealing with requires more time to conclude the job.

"Our term was due to end on May 15. But in view of the large volumes of evidence that we have recorded both orally and in writing we have been forced to ask for more time to prepare our report," LLRC's media spokesman Lakshman Wickremasinghe said today.

He said the commission had written to President Mahinda Rajapaksa last week to ask for the time extension. The LLRC was appointed by Rajapaksa a year ago to report on the conflict between February 2002 and May 2009 that ended with the military defeat of the LTTE.

Its demand for term extension comes after a UN advisory panel report, that found both the military and the LTTE culpable in war crimes, raised tempers in Sri Lanka.

Wickremasinghe, however, said the UN panel report was no consideration when making the decision to ask for the extension of time.

The three-member UN panel report which has asked for an independent investigation into alleged war crimes committed by both the government and the LTTE has said "the mandate of the LLRC as well as its work and methodology to date are not tailored to investigating allegations of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, or to examining the root causes of the decades long conflict".

Sri Lanka, however, maintains that the LLRC has been mandated to serve the accountability aspect of the conflict and its findings would be treated with the seriousness they deserve.

© Zee News

Read More

Summary only

Lanka-Israel to exchange irrigation knowledge

By Priyanka Kurugala | Daily News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

'The Irrigation technology exchange between Sri Lanka and Israel is very important as Sri Lanka after eradicating terrorism has started a rapid development drive, Irrigation and Water Resources Management Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva said.

Minister de Silva said so while participating in a discussion with Israeli Agriculture Minister Orit Noked at the Ministry recently.

The Israeli Agriculture Minister said that, they hope to provide high standard milch cows to increase Sri Lanka's milk production free.

'The Israeli government will study the reservoirs and water management systems in Sri Lanka. They hope to exchange their experience in the same field, Noked said.

'Israel hopes to popularise drip irrigation in Sri Lanka, a technology which is being widely used in agricultural work,' she said.

Under this programme the two countries will exchange their knowledge of agriculture and irrigation.

© Daily News

Read More

Summary only

Sri Lanka boxer stripped of gold medal

AFP | Teheran Times
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Disgraced Sri Lankan boxer Manju Wanniarachchi was stripped of his Commonwealth Games gold medal Sunday after he failed a second doping test for a banned steroid.

Sean McGoldrick from Wales becomes the bantamweight Games champion as a result.

The Commonwealth Games Federation’s (CGF) Federation Court said Wanniarachchi has been disqualified from the 2010 Commonwealth Games and his competition results at the Delhi Games be nullified.

"The Court has ruled that the medal awarded to him be forfeited and returned to the CGF,"" the governing body said in an email statement.

""The gold medal in the bantamweight 56 kilo weight division will be awarded to Sean McGoldrick from Wales,"" it said.

Wanniarachchi's urine sample was found to contain 19-Norandrosterone, a banned performance-enhancing substance, the body said.

Sri Lanka's National Olympic Committee last year took away Wanniarachchi's medal pending the completion of inquiries. The boxer risks a two-year ban.

Sri Lankan authorities say that the boxer may have unknowingly taken the banned steroid when he consulted a physician.

Sri Lanka also won one silver and one bronze medal in boxing and weightlifting during the October Commonwealth Games.

Two Sri Lankan athletes tested positive for nandrolone in 1998 and 2007 but they were cleared on both occasions because of alleged flaws in the inquiries against them.

© Teheran Times

Read More

Summary only

Sri Lanka ministers shave heads for Buddhist anniversary

Xinhua | People's Daily Online
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

A ruling coalition minister and a provincial minister in Sri Lanka retreated into a monastery on Sunday, having shaved their heads to mark the 2,600th anniversary of Buddhism.

"They will dedicate themselves to the religion throughout the next 10 days and indulge in religious activities including meditation", Reverend Athuraliye Rathana, a senior monk and a ruling party legislator said.

Champika Ranawaka, the minister of power and energy and Udaya Gammanpila, a ruling party minister in the western provincial council and the party's spokesman were among those who shaved their heads.

They will now move to a monastery at Kanduboda near the capital Colombo clad in white for their 10 day meditiational retreat.

The 2,600th anniversary since the Buddha's attainment of Buddhahood is to be celebrated with state backing in the Buddhist majority island.

© People's Daily Online

Read More

Summary only

Sri Lanka guarantees 'security of sea lanes' on Blake visit

JDS Info
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

The Sri Lankan government assures western powers that the sea lanes in the region has become safe since its' militarily defeated the Tamil Tigers in a bloody war that killed tens of thousands of Tamil civilians.

Addressing the Parliament on the third of May during the visit of US Assistant Secretary of State to Sri Lanka, Foreign Minister GL Peiris said that the accomplishments of the government led by Mahinda Rajapaksa "go far beyond the national situation".

Prof. Peiris declared in the house that the government has "achieved things which has brought about stability, tranquility in the entire SA region," .

"Particularly I would stress the security of the sea lanes in this region," he added.
Commenting on the report to the UN Secretary General by the experts panel, Minister Pieris critisised it for stating in the introduction that the war in Sri Lanka 'ended tragically amidst controversy'.

Panel report attacked in parliament

Prof. Peiris who said it was tragic "certainly not for the people of Sri Lanka," questioned whether it is "because the wrong side won the war".

Claiming in parliament that the panel report is "replete with palpable bias and prejudice" the foreign minister said that the panel "travels far far beyond its mandate".

"It has been set up to advice the UNSG. But it proceeds to provide gratuitous advice to the government of Sri Lanka on a wide range of matters which pertain exclusively to domestic policy. Our court system, the role of the Attorney General, public order, constitutional issues. None of these matters fall within the ambit of the mandate that the Secretary General has given to the Panel."

SL will work with UN system

However, the minister assured the parliament that the Sri Lankan government will work with the UN system in future as well.

"Far be it from us to entertain any thought of living in isolation in the contemporary world," said Minister Peiris.

Following his meeting with the Sri Lankan government team led by Minister Peiris on the 4th of May, US Asst. Secretary Robert Blake said that he is encouraged that External Affairs Minister Peiris will communicate soon with the UN Secretary General.

Blake speaks of 'positive progress'

USAS Blake who said that the government has made some 'positive progress' had praise for the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC).

"The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission is playing an important role in the reconciliation process. The Commission has heard testimony from Sri Lankans from all regions and ethnic backgrounds." a statement from USAS Blake issued by the US embassy in Colombo said.

However, the statement does not mention whether the US ASS has discussed the UNSG's panel report that called the LLRC 'deeply flawed, does not meet international standards for an effectively accountability mechanism'.

"The UN report underscores the importance of a durable political solution that can forge a prosperous, democratic and united Sri Lanka, but also the importance of dialogue between the UN and the Government of Sri Lanka," was all the US statement had to say.

© JDS Info

Related articles

• U.S. wants Sri Lanka to act first on wartime rights violations (Reuters)
• US's strategic interests in Sri Lanka- Taraki (Tamil Net)
• U.S. Cannot Afford to Lose Sri Lanka (Asian Tribune)

Read More

Summary only

Sri Lanka: Computer expert chooses evidence in camera

By Olindhi Jayasundere and Lakna Paranamanna | Daily Mirror
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Computer expert, Dr. Chathura de Silva invited by the Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) to ascertain whether the video clips telecast by Britain’s Channel 4, that showed Sri Lankan soldiers committing alleged war crimes were genuine or not, said that he wished to give evidence in camera.

Dr. de Silva, who is an Engineer and lecturer at the Moratuwa University Department of Computer Science, told the Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) that he wished to give evidence on camera as he feared for his life. Before the private submission was given yesterday, LLRC Chairman, C.R De Silva stated that de Silva was invited by the Commission to offer his expert opinion to ascertain the genuineness of the Channel 4 broadcast, which alleged that the Sri Lanka Army had killed innocent civilians.

De Silva said he was more than willing to give evidence but feared that it could be a threat to his life. He said that the university had also advised him to refrain from making a public statement to the commission owning to possible security threats.

The British TV channel alleged that Sri Lankan troops had executed captured LTTE cadres. The LLRC permits those who give evidence to the commission to make their submission either in camera or in public based on their preference.

© Daily Mirror

Read More

Summary only

Israeli Agriculture Minister visits Sri Lanka

Daily News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................

Israel's Agriculture Minister Orit Noked, accompanied by a top level Israeli agro-business delegation is on a visit to Sri Lanka until May 7. This visit, is expected to enhance cooperation between the two countries in the agriculture field.

Noked is scheduled to meet Prime Minister D M Jayaratne and other Ministers. During her meetings with government officials and farming and business communities, Minister Noked will reiterate Israel's intention to become a fully-fledged partner in Sri Lanka's development efforts.

Minister Noked and her Sri Lankan counterpart, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, will inaugurate the Agro-Business Seminar and sign an MoU to further augment the agricultural cooperation between the two countries and develop areas of mutual interest in the agriculture sector.

The various topics of cooperation included in the MoU are capacity building and transfer of know-how; technology transfer; development of R and D Systems; exchange of scientific and agricultural technology information; promotion of Public Private Partnerships (PPP); water management and innovative irrigation technologies; rural development; land conservation and precision agricultural practices.

© Daily News

Read More

Summary only