India not a Big Brother: Nirupama

Admits role in Apollo Hospital dispute, but denies any part in CWC joining Govt.

India’s headline-hitting High Commissioner Nirupama Rao has rejected any big brother image of her country and reassured that India would always be Sri Lanka’s closest and best friend.

In a wide-ranging interview with Sunday Times Ms. Rao expressed deep regret over recent comments made by Minister Anura Bandaranaike that she was acting in a manner that amounted to interference with Sri Lanka’s internal affairs.

Referring to specific matters Ms. Rao said she did intervene in matters relating to an attempt to buy over the Indian owned Apollo Hospital because she had a responsibility to protect Indian investors and investments. But she denied any role in bringing the Ceylon Workers’ Congress into the Mahinda Rajapaksa government.

Following are excerpts of the interview:

You have hit the headlines in the local media this week but not for the best of reasons?

Diplomats and the media share a symbiotic relationship in so many ways. Even in my own country, the media closely scrutinizes the activities of our foreign office. At a personal level and speaking for myself alone, I was taken aback by the remarks attributed to the Tourism Minister whom I deeply respect and with whom I have had a very cordial relationship at all times. I am guilty to only one charge in the court of public opinion – to having tirelessly tried during my tenure here to further improve and strengthen Indo-Sri Lankan relations in many fields, to deepen the understanding between our two countries and to have never at any stage, sought to take any step that would harm Sri Lanka.

Can you make an informed guess as to why you have been targeted?

I would hesitate to speculate on the matter. Suffice it to say that my faith and trust in the relationship between our two countries remains unshaken.

Could it be because of your recent intervention in the attempt to purchase the Indian owned Apollo Hospital?

Speculation is not an activity I indulge in – our training as bureaucrats teaches us otherwise. In the Apollo Hospital case, I only intervened to protect the interests of Indian investors in what is a flagship Indian project in this country. Foreign diplomats are in fact their Government's trade representatives as well and they have every business to intervene, provided it’s done the proper way, in the investments of their nationals.

Or has this got something to do with your behind-the-scenes moves to forge internal political alliances such as your virtual brokering an alliance between the CWC and the Government etc?

I completely agree with you that it is the job of a foreign diplomat to promote and protect the business interests of his/her country, as also the investments made by their country’s business corporations, to the extent possible.

That is an article of faith. As far as the forging of internal political alliances as you call it is concerned, I have never indulged in such power play, which is alien to my character. The CWC joined the Government on its own volition and on the basis of its own decision and determination where its interests lie.

Your Government has stood by you by issuing a statement on Thursday saying that you have conducted yourself "in the highest professional standards" and that India does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. Given the past, and India's - especially Tamil Nadu State Government's acknowledged support for the LTTE in its formative years, shouldn't Sri Lankans take the second part of that Indian Government statement with a pinch of salt?

I am grateful to my Government for its quick and positive response in which it has reposed its confidence in me. Non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries is one of the basic principles on which India’s foreign policy is founded. I would urge all Sri Lankans to recognize the fact that India values its special relationship with Sri Lanka and that it has shed the blood of its sons to preserve the unity and territorial integrity of this country.

You wouldn't like to be compared with one of your predecessors, Jyotindra Nath Dixit ?

All of us who worked with Mr. Dixit in the External Affairs Ministry revere his memory, his undisputed professionalism, his unswerving commitment to India’s interests, his intellectual vision and the human touch he never lost. It is not a question of being compared with him, but rather, learning from the experiences of this great diplomat and yet, bringing your own stamp and individual ability to realize the goals that are set for your work.

We did criticise the President for breaking protocol and making a visit to 'India House', your official residence for that dinner-meeting with the CWC leader. Many people did think it was improper conduct on the part of the President. You obviously didn't.

I would beg to differ – it was an honour and privilege to receive His Excellency the President at India House. Previous Presidents of this country have also visited India House from time to time. I do not want to go into the details, but I can assure you that this is the truth. The practice is not unusual and is followed in many countries where the host government shares a special relationship with the country represented by the Ambassador or High Commissioner concerned. When I was Ambassador in Peru, the then President of the country visited my residence for dinner, with his daughter and other ministers of his Cabinet.

I recall seeing a photograph dating back to the early 1960s of President John Kennedy visiting our Embassy residence in Washington, together with his Vice-President, for a dinner with our Ambassador and his wife. The examples are many. There was no breach of protocol. Diplomacy is an intricate craft, and different situations demand different responses. It is a question of the right calibration, and the nature of a particular situation. Flexibility and pragmatism, problem solving and building common ground – these are important words in my lexicon as a diplomat.

But those would have been strictly social calls. Your hosting the Sri Lankan President was to talk politics with another local political leader.

I know that there has been much speculation about that meeting. May I say quite simply that there was no talk of politics on the occasion you are referring to. The conversation was general in nature, and the mood was relaxed. At the most what can be said is that in the true spirit of Christmas, which was just around the corner, some ice was broken.

How do you yourself see your tenure here as High Commissioner for India?

It has been, so far, most fulfilling and professionally one of the most challenging assignments I have undertaken, marked by so many watershed events, including the December 2004 tsunami where India worked very closely with Sri Lanka in the relief efforts. I have made many friends, and have actually seen almost every part of the country. The relationship between India and Sri Lanka has been maintained on a steady keel, and has been marked by a spirit of mutual confidence and deepening understanding. Ours is not just a friendship, it is a partnership in many spheres – whether it is in trade and commerce, culture, cooperation in multilateral fora, capacity building in many fields, high level political dialogue and understanding, and people to people contact.

Have people you meet in Sri Lanka ever told you that there is a perception that Big Brother India is bullying Sri Lanka?

Never to my face, although one cannot miss what some media commentaries say from time to time. I realize that India’s size and its population of one billion create perceptions in the neighbourhood that are both positive and negative.

We as diplomats have to work hard to remove those negative perceptions. That is the challenge we face and must overcome. I personally do not see India as a big brother of Sri Lanka. In my mind, we are like members of one family – and remember that in many South Asian families, the little brother or sister always has his or her way!

But that apart, I would like more and more Sri Lankans to understand India better and the advantages of closer connectivity and cooperation with India and its vast development experience. As two of Asia’s oldest democracies, we are equal partners, and the adjective “big” and “small” need not apply.

Do you think you are being pushed around or bullied because you are not a Dixit?

On the contrary! I don’t recall any occasion when I’ve been pushed around or bullied. I take the media comments for or against me as part of a moving montage. Nobody promised me a rose garden! I am sufficiently insulated against what you call “bullying”. I am here to do a job, and I will strive to do it well.

Your erstwhile colleague from Pakistan now accuses India of trying to assassinate him in Colombo. There are concerns that Indo-Pakistan rivalry was overflowing to Sri Lankan soil.

These charges have been rejected unequivocally and emphatically by the Government of India. I need not add to that. There is no question of any “rivalry”, as you term it, overflowing on Sri Lankan soil. India has a multi-faceted relationship with Sri Lanka which stands on its own merits. Our relationship with Pakistan does not hyphenate our relations with Sri Lanka. On a regional note may I add that as members of SAARC, all of the countries in this region need to work together in the cause of economic development, countering terrorism, and eliminating poverty.

We know that India has woken up again to the Sri Lankan issue, and the official line is to keep lecturing about the need for a 'political settlement' to the northern insurgency. What about the need to eliminate terrorism from the sub-continent. Sri Lankans see contradictions in Indian foreign and domestic policy in dealing with terrorism.

Terrorism is a universal scourge, and we, both the Indians and Sri Lankans, are cooperating intensively within the United Nations, to see the conclusion of a Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism. Our policy against terrorism, whether foreign or domestic, brooks no dilution or compromise.

As far as the ethnic question in Sri Lanka is concerned, you are aware of the fact that the LTTE is a proscribed organization in India. We do not foster insurgency or instability in your country. Rather, we wish sincerely for peace to return once more to this beautiful island country of yours.

Yours is a pluralistic society where many religions and languages and ethnicities have co-existed for centuries. The beauty of that fabric must never fade, for the strength of Sri Lanka resides in that diversity. We stand firmly for the unity, the sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Sri Lanka and for a solution to the ethnic issue that preserves this unity while accommodating the interests of the minorities under arrangements that provide for maximum devolution.

How do you deal with Sri Lankan contradictions where on the one side they want India to ' Do something' about the northern insurgency, and on the other, they want India 'Not to interfere'.

I believe we understand Sri Lanka clearly and that we feel a great deal of empathy with all of your people. It is a complex situation that you face and there are no easy solutions. Therefore, these “contradictions” as you call them, are not difficult to comprehend. Let me assure you that India remains your closest neighbour and best friend.