SPOTLIGHT

Invest in peace - PM

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has called for foreign assistance on an urgent basis for development to consolidate the peace process and provide the people both in the north and the south a peace dividend. In an interview with The Sunday Leader Editor, Lasantha Wickremetunge in New York, the prime minister spoke of his vision for Sri Lanka where all citizens can live with dignity and equality. He also said no politician or the rich and influential will be allowed to take the law in to their own hands, stating the rule of law will apply to all in equal measure. Following are excerpts of the wide-ranging interview:

Q: SRI LANKA is today at a critical stage with the peace talks having just commenced and attempts made to resurrect the economy from the depths to which it has plunged. In the backdrop of this situation, what is the vision you have for Sri Lanka to put it back on track?

A: We urgently require foreign assistance and foreign funding. Without that Sri Lanka cannot get moving. The war has taken its toll on the economy. Last year, there was negative growth of 1.3 per cent. We have been able to turn it around with 3 per cent growth this year. But that is not sufficient. If you look at the effects of war, lots of areas have been destroyed and we have to begin reconstructing. We have to develop the country as a whole, create more jobs and increase the income levels of the people. These have to be done immediately. For a nation that has been at conflict for 20 years, when there is a cessation of hostilities and a ceasefire, the people expect the government to deliver. They will not wait till a final settlement to the conflict is found and an agreement signed to that effect. That is understandable.

A person whose house was destroyed in the north cannot wait for a few more years to have his house repaired. People who are unemployed in the south cannot wait too long to find jobs. The resources needed to meet these requirements can only be found with foreign donors. We need foreign assistance. We need foreign investment. Then, by achieving a high level of growth and maintaining that growth for some time, it will create the difference. Without the necessary resources, the revival of Sri Lanka will not take place. I like to see a country that is prosperous and a country that is free where people can advance in life according to their ability. That is the vision I have, but to fulfill that vision I need the resources.

Q: You spoke of the need to unite the country and to maintain unity. But there is a lack of unity in the south, particularly when it comes to party politics. The JVP and sections of the PA are opposing your peace initiatives. The president has come out against your actions and even accused you of not consulting her on the peace process. How do you hope to bridge this gap and build unity in these circumstances?

A: People in our country want peace. We saw that at the massive rally for peace and democracy that was held in Colombo two weeks back. It has also resulted in a big segment within the PA lobbying for peace. Even in the JVP there are MPs who prefer a different approach. So we are in transition from politics of confrontation to non-confrontational politics. It won't come immediately but I am confident there are sufficient numbers in those parties who want a change of concept in politics for the country.

I am confident of the support the people are giving for the peace process. They are driving it forward with the support of the international community. We have to face obstacles. We will never have an easy path without obstacles. So you might as well foresee these obstacles and see ways of overcoming them.

Q: You are seen to be bending over backwards to accommodate the president even though some of your own ministers have been critical of the president and your style of cohabitation, on the belief the president is seeking to undermine the process. The president herself has gone on record saying she wants to take away some of your powers. We also saw recently the 'out coup' document of the PA wherein a plan was mapped out to topple the government, undermine the peace process, and sow the seeds of dissension among the security forces and the people. Are you confident despite the stand taken by the president, a majority of the PA members will cooperate with you and move towards consensual politics.

A: At a critical time like now where we have started peace talks, it is important we have general agreement in the south. So, I have to make room and make a lot of concessions to get that agreement. But that does not mean everyone will get on board. There will be some who will stay out, some who will get on board, some who will jump off, some who will get on board and shout and some who will get on board and support it. But I am confident that a large section of the PA will get on board and stay on board the peace process.

Q: That is given as a primary reason behind the 19th Amendment to ensure stability in the government, for the peace process and economic revival to move forward. Towards that end efforts were made to bring the president and the PA on board but the president has taken the position she will not support this amendment. Are you still confident the PA members will back this amendment to give the government the required two thirds majority?

A: The 19th Amendment was brought to fill a vacuum in the constitution in a parliament where there will be cohabitation. Though it is based on the French model, even President Jayewardene went on the basis parliament and the presidency will be ruled by the same party. It was assumed there will be a parliament that will reflect the views of the president. But that is not happening now. If you go for elections now or after December, the UNP is going to win. Therefore, we have to make arrangements for a cohabitation parliament.

In drafting it we consulted the PA MPs also. So, a broad section of parliament was involved in it. In fact I sent a copy to the president too. The 19th Amendment Bill, which was gazetted and presented to parliament is still open for discussion and amendment. We have not closed the door yet. As I am aware now, there is a two thirds majority to pass the 19th Amendment.

Q: Let us assume for a moment that you don't get the two thirds majority. What are the options open to you?

A: Then we will have a crisis and most probably will have to go in for elections.

Q: You are currently pushing the twin issues of peace and development here in New York. What is the response you are receiving from the international community.

A: A good response from the countries I have spoken to and the UN agencies and others. It's in a way a process for peace. Generally, aid and assistance comes only after a solution is found. Now we are talking of a development phase paving the way for a final solution.

Q: Your thrust for development, is it limited to reconstruction and rehabilitation of the north-east or the country as a whole where all people will enjoy the peace dividend?

A: It is for the reconstruction of the north-east and the development of the country as a whole. When Sri Lanka develops the north east also benefits. Secondly, as I mentioned earlier, if we are to rebuild this country, we can't get all the resources from outside. The economy has to grow fast and we must sustain it. Development also means going in for a high rate of growth which will in turn generate further resources for reconstruction.

Q: There is a popular belief the UNP is a better manager of the economy even during times of conflict. But there is also a perception now your government has failed to kick start the economy with no major projects started. Would you subscribe to the view the economy could move a little faster and if so what are the drawbacks you are facing.

A: Firstly, we turned the economy around and there is going to be growth this year. We had power cuts and we overcame that and we have 3 percent growth. Now we are looking at 5 to 6 percent growth and to increase it to 8 and 10 percent growth over a period of 10 years. This is the first time we have inherited an economy with negative growth. Even in 1977 there was no negative growth. At worst of times growth was 1 percent or a little less. Never negative. So the first task was to turn the economy around. Secondly, Sri Lankan companies no longer have the resources for an immediate spurt. It was not so in 1977. There was a captive market then and could go ahead. By 1989,1990 there were two to three bad years but there were sufficient resources and we brought statutes for liberalisation so that industries could go ahead. At that time agriculture was affected by a drought. The tea market was down with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the Gulf War, and Iraq having to go out of the tea market completely. Today companies are holding on. Debt levels are very high. So we still have to find the resources.

Tourists are now coming to Sri Lanka but many hotels can't upgrade their facilities to meet the demand because of accumulated debts over the last few years. There has to be financial reconstruction in the country. Therefore, movement is initially slow. The private sector can't move as fast as they could have done earlier. We are now looking at a multi pronged strategy of opening up certain sectors like the financial sector, IT sector and tourism allowing at least a section of the hotel industry to develop fast. We are also trying to improve our agricultural production. All these are essential in the short term for productivity growth.

Q: It is also said more public spending would help generate employment.

A: Public spending alone cannot help generate employment at this stage. If you take the large projects, how many are in force? What we need are money and resources to help the private sector to create more jobs. Public spending even in Japan has not succeeded. Public spending was useful at one time. That is, for short-term downturns it has helped turn economies around but it has not done so in Sri Lanka today. What we are trying to look at are the largest aid projects in Sri Lanka.

Take the Mahaweli project. We spent a lot of money on it and what is the result? We are getting about 4.5 metric tons per hectare. So we thought we will make the maximum utilisation of the money spent on the Mahaweli project by driving it up to 60 metric tons. What we have to do is maximise the utilisation of foreign aid projects already in operation rather than look at new ones. In any case, even if it brings results, it will be five years down the road.

Q: Donors have been heard to say there is a lot of unutilised money lying around. Would you say that is a fair criticism?

A: No, donors have given all that is possible now. I think they did not expect the peace talks to move so fast. We are talking with the donors to get more funds. As far as the reconstruction is concerned, we have more projects than the funding available. On the development side, not yet because we have just gone into the standby agreement and they are coming into the power field and growth strategy. But we have to look at the projects and what we have to do is look at projects which are essential to Sri Lanka for its development, not projects for the sake of projects

Q: Chris Patten, the external relations commissioner of the European Union said the other day you are going ahead with the peace process at a grave political risk to yourself. Domestically, you are also facing opposition to the government's privatisation and restructuring programme, the insurance corporation privatisation for example. Are you committed to going ahead with the tough economic reforms that are needed notwithstanding the opposition?

A: There are people who are for privatisation and those against. Insurance Corporation is one we have to go through with because we have not tapped the full potential of the insurance market. Once we go through with it and start tapping the full potential, you will see more jobs created in the next two or three years and the income levels of those working in the sector going up. Therefore some of these things are essential.

Q: Getting back to the peace process, taking into consideration the opposition that is being built up on the deproscription and the interim administration, how seriously will it in your view affect the peace process?

A: There wasn't that much opposition to deproscription. The people realised it was necessary. Government members had by then already had two rounds of negotiations with the LTTE while the proscription was in place. There will of course be opposition, which is politically motivated. That we will face.

Q: The law and order situation is another area of concern to the people. Last week we heard of some rowdy incidents at a five star hotel where bodyguards of rich and influential people were wielding weapons. What concrete steps are you hoping to take to maintain law and order and prevent such ugly incidents?

A: I heard about it. I discussed it with John Amaratunga who is here and he told the police to start investigating. If the hotel concerned has not reported the incident and investigations show there was an incident then we have to charge the hotel for not reporting a crime.

Hotels cannot allow access to people who are carrying firearms, who are having so called private bodyguards carrying weapons into their premises. The Tourist Board will have to cancel the licences of hotels that are allowing this to happen. It is bad for Sri Lanka and the maintenance of law and order. I also told the police they cannot allow private bodyguards to carry weapons. I am going to hold the police also responsible if they allow this to happen. If there are rich brats who want to handle firearms, they can contact the army commander and join the army. But I cannot allow the breakdown of law and order.

Q: In the past we also had reports involving politicians and their kith and kin.

A: We have to ask the police to investigate all such incidents and take action. What is the use of arresting some poor boy from the shanties for carrying weapons when they see the rich people getting away with it? We must start from there. Then we can start enforcing law and order in every village and the urban areas.

Q: Another concern raised by the president is the preparedness of the security forces in the event the peace process breaks down. Are the armed forces ready to meet such an eventuality?

A: I don't think the peace process will breakdown but for the first time we have a full defence minister whose focus is on reforming the armed forces. He needs the confidence the armed forces can meet any eventuality. We have already taken a large number of steps to reorganise the army for the future, for the post conflict situation. Some of the friendly countries have sent in delegations to advise on the necessary steps to be taken. In fact what we need at the moment is also a combined command.

A committee appointed by the defence secretary has now recommended the setting up of a joint command on the lines of the American joint chiefs of staff. The reports have been forwarded to me and the president. The ministry is already taking steps to establish that. In the meantime we want to fill the post of chief of defence staff so that then the holder of that office can implement the proposal. We are improving the command structure and more people are being sent for training and the whole system of training and education in the army is being looked at.

There is also the recommendation of the foreign analysts that promotions be made on merit rather than seniority alone. The minister is going through that and these changes will be implemented after he speaks to me and the president.

Q: Do you find the president cooperating with regard to the restructuring process considering the three year extension given to the navy commander and one year to the army commander, effectively ruling out the possibility of several senior members rising to the commander's post?

A: There are certain problems in the navy, which I read in the newspapers. But the defence minister had recommended extensions for the navy commander and the army commander. What has happened is that the extension of the navy commander was given for three years. But the president has been interested in restructuring the security forces. She herself has recommended the appointment of a committee to look at a joint command. I have not been able to speak to her after the reports came. The minister will be speaking to her and I myself will be going through the reports when I return and have a final discussion. I can't see any reason why the president will oppose the restructuring