Opinion:

' SL and India fishery conflict needs urgent attention'

Lankan fishermen robbed of their livelihood:

By Ranil Wijayapala

The Palk Bay, the narrow strip of sea between India and Sri Lanka has run into controversy over the past few decades as continued poaching of the lucrative fishing grounds of Sri Lanka by Indian fishermen made a platform for both India and Sri Lanka to point an accusing finger at each other.

Today, it has become an important economic and political issue in the country as the northern fishers started fishing after the end of the war against terrorism which kept them away from fishing for nearly 30 years, now face stiff competition from the poaching Indian trawlers, who steal the fish and damage their nets.

Oscar Amarasinghe, a professor in Agriculture Economics, of the Faculty of Agriculture, Ruhuna University is a partner in a research project on “Reincorporating the Excluded- Providing space for small scale fishers in the sustainable development of fisheries in South Africa and South Asia”.

The objective of this project is to advance and assess the development of governance frameworks for the understanding and resolution of core fishery conflicts in two major fishing regions: South Africa and South Asia. In both instances the sustained conflict has severely impacted the small-scale fisheries. Apartheid has resulted in the marginalisation of small-scale fishers in South Africa.

Prof. Amarasinghe, the Dean, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ruhuna and a Member of the University Council discussed the seriousness of the fishery conflict between Sri Lanka and India which he described as an issue that needs urgent attention from both Sri Lanka and India.

Excerpts of the interview the Sunday Observer had with Prof. Oscar Amarasinghe.

Question: We continuously hear about incidents of poaching of the Sri Lanka territorial waters by Indian fishermen. At present these incidents have become a big issue between the two countries. How has it developed to become a bilateral issue?

Answer: Palk Bay was the source of livelihood to tens of thousands of fishermen of Sri Lanka and South India since time immemorial.

Rather than a contested territory, it bridged the people of the two countries together, through marriage, language and ethnicity. There were no disputes between the two groups who fished in harmony with each other and the Kachchativu island was also used by the fishing community of both countries. However, developments saw radical changes in the structure and organisation in fisheries in the region. The 1950’s saw a tremendous growth in international demand for shrimps which also coincided with the onset of the ‘blue revolution’ where both countries introduced new motorised fishing technology and techniques (trawling in India and gill netting in Sri Lanka), which finally led to large increases in fish production.

The next important development in the region was the setting up of the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) in 1974, by signing an agreement, known as, the Agreement between India and Sri Lanka on the Boundary in Historic Waters between the Two Countries and Related Matters (Gandhi and Bandaranaike, 1974). The boundary line was decided based on the principle of equidistance, and Kachchativu became part of the Sri Lankan territory of the Palk Bay.

Q: How did the situation develop to affect maritime resources in Sri Lanka especially due to the use of illegal fishing methods by the Indian fishermen?

A: The technique of trawling adopted by Tamil Nadu fishers to catch shrimp and other fish species close to the ocean bottom, is known as ‘bottom trawling’, where enormous bag-shaped nets are pulled along the ocean floor, catching every rock, piece of coral, and fish in their paths. This technique literally scrapes the ocean floor clean of life and, is tantamount to bulldozing the Sinharaja forest. After damaging the ecosystem on their side by intense trawling, the Indian trawl fleet started venturing into the Sri Lankan side of the Palk Bay in the early 1980s by crossing the IMBL. Today, trawlers from Rameshwaram, Mandapam (Ramnad District), Kottaipatinam, Jagadapatinam (Pudukottai District), Kodikarai and further north of the Bay of Bengal (Nagapatinam), all violate the IMBL and fish on the Sri Lankan side.

Their poaching sites now include not only Mannar, Kilinochchi, Jaffna, and Point Pedro, but also Mullaitivu and Kalpitiya on the north-east and north-west coasts. The war against terrorism in Sri Lanka in 1983 saw the easy passage of Indians into Lankan waters because the Sri Lankan fishers rarely fished in their waters due to a number of area and time restrictions imposed by the security forces.

Q: But how did the Indian fishermen poach into Sri Lankan waters and practise illegal fishing methods in the presence of the Sri Lanka Navy and the Sri Lankan fishermen especially after the end of terrorism in Sri Lanka?

A: Evidently, the intense trawling on the Sri Lankan side of the Palk Bay takes place under the nose of the Sri Lankan Navy and fishers complain that the SL Navy is not taking action against poachers. This kind of open smuggling that takes place with the knowledge of the authorities, has triggered other illegal practices too. The small trawl fleet in Pesalai, Gurunagar and Valvetithurai is quite active today, although trawling is banned in the country. A kind of stake net or wing net (ahalasiragu valai / kattudela), made from galvanised pipes fitted with nets fixed in the near shore area, are also causing considerable damage to craft and gear of gill net fishers operating in the Mannar area.

At the same time southern fishers are now migrating in larger numbers to the North, aiming at scuba diving for sea cucumber, although, scuba diving is banned in the North. The Indian trawlers, which earlier aimed at exploiting shrimp resources, are now engaged in harvesting sea cucumber too. Since sea cucumber cannot be sold in Tamil Nadu (banned), these fishers sell their catch to local merchants. The latter, who benefit from South Indian trawl fishers, would naturally want to maintain the status quo and welcome Indian intrusion.

Q: How does this situation affect Sri Lanka in economic terms and the Lankan fishermen in the North?

A: The costs associated with these changes and developments are huge. Fish landings in Jaffna and Mannar, which accounted for nearly 37 percent of all marine landings in the country in 1983 now account for only 10 percent of country’s total marine landings.

Escaping the naked eye, a massive destruction is also taking place under the waters of Palk Bay due to intense trawling. Sri Lanka is not only losing billions of rupees each year due to poaching by Tamil Nadu trawl boats, but also the means of livelihood of its future generations.

There are about 30,000 fishing families in the Mannar, Kilinochchi and Jaffna districts, whose livelihoods are seriously affected. The northern fishers are entangled in a ‘triple net’ - first the agony of the war on terrorism then the Indian smugglers, and now, the southern fishers and merchants, all bringing them misery.

Q: We have observed many discussions at bilateral level between India and Sri Lanka taking place from time to time. Do you think these efforts are fruitful?

A: Both governments have given serious concern to the issue and an MoU was signed in 2008, which made provision for the establishment of a Joint Working Group (JWG), which among other things, would deal with issues of poaching and arrests. Already several rounds of discussions have been held but no significant developments have been reported, other than agreeing that fishers in both countries should pursue fishing activity in a safe, secure and sustainable manner. At the 8th meeting of the Indo-Sri Lanka Joint Commission held in New Delhi on January 22 both countries agreed that the use of force could not be justified under any circumstances and reiterated the importance of continuing to extend humane treatment to all fishermen. It is evident that nothing substantial has been officially achieved in resolving the burning issues at Palk Bay.

No doubt the Tamil Nadu government is in a more precarious position than the Sri Lanka Government because the former is expected to take immediate steps to cope with the issue of border crossing and poaching by their trawl fleet. Of course, it cannot withdraw its trawl fleet overnight, which provides livelihood to nearly 50,000 households. Yet, alternatives to border crossing and poaching have not been worked out for its trawler fleet by the TN government.

Q: There were talks between the fisher communities of both countries to resolve the issue. Do you think that such discussions could resolve the matter?

A: Some progress had been achieved in the fisher-fisher folks. Two discussions have taken in the past. A goodwill mission consisting of a group of fishers from Tamil Nadu visited Sri Lanka in May 2004, organised by ARIF (Association for the Release of Innocent Fishermen). The group discussions resulted in two points of view. The Sri Lankan fishermen wanted an end to trawling in their waters. They felt the Indian trawlers could be given a few months to stop trawling. The Indian fishermen, on the other hand, wanted to keep a thee-mile distance from the shore and avoid certain trawl nets.

There was no government backing to this agreement and the subsequent follow up is not known. ARIF organised another discussion between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lankan Northern fishers during August 16-22, 2010. About 23 Lankan fishers with two government officials from Sri Lanka met Tamil Nadu fishers from Nagapattinam, Jagathapattanam, Rameshwaram, Welankanni, Puthukottai, Mallipattinam, Ramanathpuram, Pamban, and Thangachchimadam. The Indians agreed to stop mechanised trawl fishing in Sri Lankan waters within one year, during which time, only 70 days of trawling were to be allowed. Only two days of fishing (only Mondays and Saturdays, instead of three days as at present) was promised.

Q: Do you think that these fisher organisations are receiving the patronage of the Governments of both countries to resolve the issue?

A: Although some headway has been made through fisher-fisher folks, both governments had turned a blind eye to the agreements, although they provided them with an opportunity by opening the gates for a negotiable settlement.

It is surprising why the role of fisher dialogues in resolving conflicts was undermined by the authorities. The fishers are interested in their livelihoods and wellbeing, whereas the governments are involved in wider political issues, for which the Palk Bay is used as a political weapon. The Kachchativu issue is one such example. The Government of Sri Lanka, which insists that maritime boundaries should not be violated, still does not take any action against the Indian intruders, and has remained surprisingly calm amidst serious protests made by fishers in the North. Although the last JWG meeting ended by Indians inviting a Sri Lankan fisher delegation to Tamil Nadu to meet Indian fishers to find a solution to the conflicts, the urgency of the initiative has faded away.

Q:So how do you think these talks could make headway to end the deadlock?

A: Fisher-fisher talks should trigger off fisher-government discussions, which in turn would trigger government-government talks. It is this type of multi-tier talks that would establish the interactive platform consisting of all stakeholders who would deliberate on their experiences, knowledge and ideas to formulate the governance arrangements for the Palk Bay. Regretfully, the need for such interactive platforms has not been recognised by the authorities.

The stubbornness and inaction by the parties concerned continues to breed hate among parties and bring misery to the poor northern fishers, who have lost almost everything, including their right to live.

Q: What consequences will we have to face if the situation continues in future?

A: Of the 5,300 trawl boats in Tamil Nadu, about 2,500 are fully or seasonally dependent on Sri Lanka waters to secure a profitable catch.

The latter will continue to damage the Palk Bay ecosystem on the Lankan side. Given that the Indian side of the Palk Bay is significantly degraded, if we allow the status quo to continue, all parties will suffer in the long run, because the Palk Bay will be devoid of fish. Thus, trawling has to be stopped. This means, the TN government has to work out a trawl fleet reduction programme. It cannot take place overnight because of the massive numbers of households depending on trawling for their livelihood.

Q: The Tamil Nadu government is exploiting the situation to exert pressure on the Central Government of India to change its stance on Sri Lanka. How will this affect the fishing community of Sri Lanka?

A: It appears that there is no will on the part of the TN government to take immediate steps to reduce its trawl fleet. Evidently, the TN government was more involved in exerting pressure on its Central Government to support UN human rights resolution against Sri Lanka and its continued concern on the violation of the rights of the Sri Lankan Tamils. This has masked the real fisheries issues that have led to the present conflicts in the Palk Bay. The very people in TN who have sympathy towards the northern Sri Lankan population who suffered due to terrorism are encouraging their own fishers to poach in Lankan waters posing a threat to the livelihoods of thousands of Sri Lankan Tamil families.

Q: What can the Tamil political parties in Sri Lanka do in this regard?

A: Tamil political parties in Sri Lanka, such as the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), too has an important role to play in this regard.

Surprisingly, they have remained silent on the issue, whereas they could have appealed to the Indian Government and, particularly the TN government, not to deprive the Tamil-speaking population in the north of their livelihood.

Q: What action can the Sri Lankan Navy take to control the situation ?

A: Token arrests of Indian fishers violating the IMBL and the initiation of fisher-fisher talks are two means available to Sri Lanka, of sending signals to the TN government in reducing its trawl fleet. The arrest of 53 fishers and nine Tamil Nadu trawl boats in mid March by the Sri Lankan Navy could be a signal sent to the TN government. It is imperative that fisher representatives of the two countries meet. The Lankan fishers could discuss ways and means of stopping trawling and poaching, in direct confrontation with their TN counterpart. This could trigger fisher-government discussions and finally government-government discussions.

Q: What are the steps the Tamil Nadu government can take to resolve the issue without affecting the livelihood of their fisher community?

A: The Tamil Nadu government has to work out a strategy to shift the fishing efforts from trawling into other spheres of fishing activity.

Deep sea fishing could be a good alternative. The announcement by the Tamil Nadu Finance Minister in his recent budget speech, of enhancing state subsidies from 25% to 50% in procuring new tuna long liners is welcome. A post budget statement by Chief Minister Jayalalithaa Jeyaram, announcing the provision of 75% subsidy in installing communication equipment to deep sea vessels is also encouraging.

The Tamil Nadu Government could obtain assistance from Sri Lanka to train its fishers and negotiate joint ventures in multi-day fishing to exploit the under-exploited waters beyond their continental shelf. This may reduce the incidence of poaching in Indian waters by Sri Lankan multi-day boat fishers. The TN government could also implement the trawl buy back scheme which they have been planning for some time.

Q: What solutions are available at present for the governments of both countries to resolve the issue?

A: As agreed at the last JWG discussions in January 2012, a Memorandum of Understanding on Development and Cooperation in the field of fisheries could be worked out by the two countries.

This may not only deal with issues of fishing, ensuring that fishing activity is pursued in a safe, secure and sustainable manner, as agreed by both parties at the JWG discussions, but also management issues such as jointly managing Palk Bay waters to ensure the health of the ecosystem and sustainable utilisation of resources.