|
|
 |
  |
| Sunday, 19 September 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features |  |
| News Business Features Editorial
|
Sri Lanka foreign policy since 1994 by Prof. A. Sivarajah (Department of Political Science University of Peradeniya) Given the complex nature of the determinants and other factors which
influence the making of foreign policy, it is not surprising that there is
no agreement among scholars as well as statesmen regarding the exact
meaning of the phrase "foreign policy". For example Gibson, Thus Hugh Gibson defines foreign policy as a "well rounded, comprehensive plan, based on knowledge and experience for conducting the business of government with the rest of the world. It is aimed at promoting and protecting the interest of the nation" F. S. Northedge considers "foreign policy to be the use of political influence in order to induce other states to exercise their law making power in a manner desired by the state concerned. "Whereas K. Frankel writes that foreign policy" colonsists of decisions and actions which involve to some appreciable extent relations between one state and others" The essence of foreign policy, therefore, is the use of state's resources to induce such behaviour on the part of other states as what would promote its national interest. In the case of Sri Lanka, two important aspects of its polity which have significant bearings in the formulation of its foreign policy should be mentioned first. (i) Since Independence there have been changes in the party or parties in power which in turn affected the foreign policy of Sri Lanka, and (ii) There is a fundamental agreement among the two major parties vis-a-vis the United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) on important areas of foreign policy . For example 'on issues relating to anti colonialism, disarmament and arms control, and non involvement with power blocs'. At the same time, a difference of opinion prevails in their attitude towards some other areas of foreign policy. For example on questions like relations with western and communist countries. 'Apart from these: as S. U. Kodikara has pointed out "a divergence has existed among the principal political parties as regards the definition of the national interest itself'. Since there was a change in government in 1994, an attempt will be made in this paper to examine the changes in foreign policy of Sri Lanka since 1994. The purpose of the study The purpose of the study is to examine the foreign policy of Sri Lanka since 1994, this study will try to find answers to the following questions: (i) Whether there were changes in the foreign policy of Sri Lanka since 1994? (ii) If so what were the major changes introduced by the P. A. Government? (iii) Were they different from the previous (UNP) Government's policy The hypothesis of the study is that a transformation took place in Sri Lanka's foreign policy from 1994. In a study on South Asian insecurity and the great powers, Barry Buzan pointed out that distinct and significant sub systems of security relations exist among some sets of states. He, therefore, developed a framework of analysis applicable to the South Asian subsystem. According to this framework the first step is to "understand the security dynamics at each level and then see how the patterns at each level interact with each others" Buzan identified four levels: domestic, regional super regional, and global. Following the framework developed by Buzan an attempt will be made first to discuss how the internal political and economic changes in Sri Lanka since 1994 had influenced the changes in Sri Lanka's foreign policy. Secondly an attempt will be made to analyze how the political changes at the regional level have affected the changes in Sri Lanka's foreign policy. Finally an attempt will be made to analyze how the political changes at global level have affected the changes in Sri Lanka's foreign policy. To be continued |
|
| News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
| Produced by Lake House |
Modelski, Northedge, Frankel, Bandopadyaya, Appadorai and others not only
differ in their attempt to define foreign policy but also in their
emphasis on different aspects of foreign policy. However one finds a broad
agreement among these writers on one aspect, namely that the foreign
policy of a country should promote the national interest of that country.
