The Coming War in Asia - How Sri Lanka Gets Caught in the Crossfire

0:00 The committee said there was a going to be a huge national security problem. He called me and said, "Do you see any security threat?" I said, "No, this is all rubbish." It's all rubbish because uh you don't need to you don't invite CIA. They usually come uninvited. Our guest today is Dr. Asanga Abbeuna Seeker, national security strategist, founding director of the Institute of National Security Studies, former director of the Lakshman Kadirama Institute, an adviser to the IMF and a man that some believe is a patriot while others believe is an asset of the CIA. President Trump's statement saying that don't give it on lease, don't lease out uh Diego Garcia to Mores because moment you do that the Chinese will come in. Few days after he studied the Chinese ship was there. He said that we are

0:45 against them because of geopolitics and I said hold on there's something wrong with that there's something wrong with the data point because geopolitics >> geopolitics yeah that means somebody's paid somebody is paid them course is the uh 2 weeks before the Easter Sunday bombing we had the secretary defense uh of India on a very high level meeting so we spoke about fishing boats we spoke about you know other ordinary but nothing on this what I'm saying is like someone took it off the agenda. So I mean clearly that was not on the agenda. >> Asanga, welcome to the podcast. Welcome from the island. >> Thank you so much. Thank you for having me. >> So uh as as the audience knows, you're a

1:31 preeminent geopolitical expert with a lot of lot of expertise in South Asia. So given everything going on in the world right now, it's a good time to have you. I want to start by asking you about um the US submarine that's a big topic of discussion here that went on off EE. So you know there's a lot of discussion about this in Sri Lanka. A lot of geopolitical awareness has now come here. Um and then we often think about this as Sri Lanka is a neutral nation and we we we really run with that and I understand how neutrality can benefit us. Of course. Um, when I think about neutrality though, neutrality, do you think neutrality makes sense if we actually have very little leverage when

2:17 we go into the geopolitical game in my correct me if I'm wrong, but without leverage neutrality doesn't matter. >> Mhm. >> So my whole understanding is that with it's all about the leverage that we possess. So where do you see this going for Sri Lanka in terms of our foreign policy? Should we remain take this neutral stance or should we focus more on strategic autonomy and build up points of leverage? Yeah. So there are several questions in here. >> Run with it. Run with it all. >> So uh first is the submarine that you mentioned right. So now the the attack uh to the Iranian ship Iris Dina. So

3:04 basically the ship came for a uh military drill. Um according to Kval Sibal that's the foreign secretary of uh India. >> He she says clearly that uh the ship was unarmed. I >> you come for a military sometimes they are unarmed and it was unarmed. Um but also the party that um took the ship down uh also was invited. the United States was also invited but they didn't participate at the last minute of um so then when they were in the Sri Lankan EZ um this attack happened so first thing is that uh to say that they didn't know about it

3:50 >> that the information was not available is a bit of um so I think I you can't hard to believe that >> you doubt yeah >> because it it came for military drill it was unarmed >> and then the party that basically the the US also probably had the information I believe according to convuls um the Indian version of that is obviously I mean what they are trying to articulate their position I believe that's correct >> right >> um then it comes to the Sri Lankan situation where it was shut down inside the EZ so as uh a nation that follows the law of the sea UN law of the sea. Um so we we are under the um article 58 clearly mentions that

4:39 if you're going to put down a ship or if that military action is going to take place inside the EZ um the party has to inform the coastal state >> that is Sri Lanka some sort of premation operations should come >> before uh you attack. So I think that's a breach of uh article 58 clearly >> and uh but US is not a signary >> to an clause law of the sea >> but they they do mention that they respect the law of the sea of course and the norms and the values of you know um so that's that's that's something um that we have to understand um that's what's that has happened so legally as

5:26 well as the position but the government's position as well as Indian government has taken the right position because they said that we work according to norms and values of the international laws. So we took the Geneva convention to protect the people. That's what we did. We saved some lives. That's amazing. I mean it's heroic >> saving lives while many died. >> Um then we rescued 200 others from another ship from Trinkaly. Again that's also heroic because you're saving lives under the Geneva convention. So so India also took that position basically saying that you know we will act according to the norms and values of the whatever is there. M >> uh I think that's what both both the countries as well as the many countries

6:14 who are not part of this war who are victims now of the geopolitics of Middle East uh would need to sort of uh get into that same sort of uh I would say direction because what can we do I mean as a nation we don't have the strength to advocate in in position uh I mean tell them what to do but we would know what our position is that our position is is according to the norms and values of the world that you know we will follow that the rules base order you know and all that you know but there is a problem where the west who has been speaking about it I mean United States including which I have captured in my book in many interviews they ask me the

6:59 question that uh so where are you talking about norms values rules based order do you have it >> from where you come >> which means I I was writing this book when I was in Washington. So >> right >> Vietnam I got the same question in Cambodia Thailand >> uh democracy democracy index you know all that. So >> uh it's a time of trust deficit in the world. Then I come to your other part of the question the neutrality. >> Sure. >> All the countries if you look at the Southeast Asia and South Asia which I captured in my book they believe in a neutrality. They want a balance foreign policy they use this balance on neutrality in different words. >> So um in Vietnam they call it the bamboo diplomacy. >> Right? So the bamboo is a basically you

7:45 have strong roots uh and you have when the wind comes you sort of uh swing to whatever side but which means that they will bring the benefit to the country >> it's kind of a multi-line balance they use the words you know it's kind of a mix of it >> and I assume this is part of their grand strategy >> it's it's coming from shipping right >> this bamboo diplomacy then Thailand also has the same >> that's very interesting So I did the Thai interviews and we also have bamboo. Which one is the first one? >> Right. >> Right. The Thai or the um Vietnamese but the thighs means the same thing. Uh roots are strong principles values but then we get the benefits from what I mean if you look at Thai has signed with

8:32 the United States military u they have a military presence there. M >> they have close uh US relationships uh as well as many um Southeast Asia as well as the other country but um the thing is that they have benefited from China also >> right >> when you see when you look at the trade volumes as well as others. So what Sri Lanka uh I think um has not got is that like the foreign policy we say balance now um basically if you take president the previous government which is the um if you take the city center's government >> right >> starting from that >> he used the term balanced and Asiaentric >> um it has I mean when you try to say if

9:20 you ask him to explain it >> you find it difficult he will find it difficult also >> what does Asiaentric and then balance means then you have got bears then he use u uh he used another term uh it's not um it's not multi-align China primary US second no he he used a geographic term actually one of his features it's not balance but um it's um it's more of a uh it's like equidistance exactly Yeah. So he says equidist >> then I was wondering like what he was talking about equidistance means it's a it's a geographic context. Uh I mean you are equally distanced kind of uh but but

10:06 >> so by that logic then he'd be advocating for very close relations with India due to proximity >> and when he said equidistant but his foreign secretary was saying something else. So that's why I captured in my last book. >> Uh he said India first in his first interview we have India first foreign policy. Then a week after that he corrected saying we know it's not India first we have Sri Lanka first he was on live TV. So when I when I captured that but what's interesting is all these statements because Sri Lanka does not have a clear foreign policy written >> as well as articulated by our leaders uh by regime to regime you know taking it forward. Now Vietnam has one uh policy which is bamboo diplomacy carried from you know years >> but they are a one party state. one

10:52 party but but Thailand is not >> right >> but Thailand also has the same uh I mean if you look at Singapore uh India >> uh is one of the best examples they use multi-align >> uh they used non-align principles as their base of course we are non-aligned nations during the cold war >> um so Sri Lanka also used non-align like Mahindra Raj Paku used the term non-align um and also our president present president also. So the balance uh how you're going to balance uh we we are not clear none of uh so I think the reason we don't write it is also because uh once you write it you don't have the flexibility to change

11:40 um I think that's one of the weaknesses that we have so you need to write this down so you need to have a written proper foreign policy um that's one of the biggest weakness and now Another issue is that we are very passive. >> If you look at from 1970s, only time I see if you read the foreign policy of Sri Lanka from 1940s to now uh you had an active a really active foreign policy is during um during Simmaan I believe. Now if you look at this submarine case also you can apply the one of her ideas in 1973 Indian zone for peace that came from her >> but it came from a team a really good team uh who was working Shaly Amar

12:25 Singha Kumaretti who passed away 2 years ago is one of the brilliant minds um I personally met him uh and also sort of you know try to understand the uncle's uh the seabed mining uh issues and how because he was the chair of the seabed mining authority also singer. >> Then he was also chair of the enclos starting from 1967. Um I think he was also chair for Israeli um you know the the rights you know the the atrocities as well as the issues. I think he was the chair not sure but um I think he was because he was chair for several and singing's contributions. So he she had a very good team. Okay,

13:11 that's what I'm trying to say. Um, the team managed to come up with these amazing uh ideas. Of course, she was visionary too. Um, so I have heard about her in my travels. I've traveled to for all these work for the last 10 years that I've been doing several books. This is my fifth book. Um, so traveled to more than about I would say 40 47 countries. >> Um, what I hear is about her, >> right? If I go to like I was in Havana uh in Cuba so it's about sido. >> Okay. >> You had >> that's interesting. >> The taxi driver knew who Simo was. That's amazing. So >> in Cuba >> she knew. So that's he said salon he didn't know but he spoke about salon but then he only one person they knew at

13:58 simo >> okay >> in Slovenia there's only one person they know that is simo because of the relationship with marshal tito >> right >> and so I was in Krang was going to bled for a conference and uh this is in Slovenia and in Krang they showed me where she dined with Marshall Tito and so they a lot of respect for her because I think there was a maledominated world at that time and she was the only >> the first daughters >> first female prime minister and she was uh she was carrying herself really well >> right >> and um then comes of course u so I think the foreign policy of her uh was really good I mean I would say very active not

14:44 passive playing a role with the big powers I mean Indian Ocean zone for peace means that you know we want to create a zone of peace. You can have the cold war but don't militarize the ocean. Our ocean sorry >> but um was that effective sa in because I remember there was of course there was a time when um you know the Americans the British ganged up on India to say the least and then the Soviets kind of came to their aid by parking submarines here in the so-called zone of peace you know as a intermediary and it worked. So what I was trying to get to was also even the zone of peace you're talking about. >> How can we actually enforce this nice idea if we don't have any sort of hard power >> if we don't have the leverage to do so.

15:30 >> Yeah. So that's where basically the geopolitics and the the really school come in where even NU understood that when you had the surprise attack >> right um although you are nonline you you know have strike deals with bandong and all that then you have a surprise attack >> so in terms of geopolitics the my subject so um I mean you you are sort of if you look at in the really school you you are prone to expect this sort of hard power the hard power you can see the expansions that's happening if you look at the NATO's expansion Sweden coming in >> or if you look at Greenland's I mean talk United States is talking about Greenland president then about what's

16:16 happening in Iran >> so that's hard power >> um so it's kind of um I mean if you look at it from two so trap to natural that you have when you have a existing power and you have a rising power. It is natural that you have these tendencies. So which is uh some say this war was created to sort of u put some limits to uh China's growth the tremendous growth which has been captured in this trade volumes and you know massive because China depends heavily 80% of oil as well as all that it energy comes from Iran >> kind of a indirect uh sort of an attempt to slow down um I

17:03 believe 80% % passes through this their 80% their oil as you capture in the book. >> Yeah. So if you look at the situations even in Diab Garcia two weeks ago if you look at President Trump's statement saying that don't give it on lease this is uh and it's a direct quote from his ex written to um prime minister of England of Britain saying that uh don't lease out um Diego Garcia to Morous because moment you do that the Chinese will come in >> coming right and they have a lot of influence Yeah. A few days after his study, the Chinese ship was there. So we we do our what we do in our research >> is that our researchers they keep track

17:49 of what's going on in the region quite well. >> Uh when there is Chinese research vessels, there was a research vessel very close. Uh we even I even posted a picture of that. Um what's so you see there is no guarantee that the Chinese I mean if they want to open up as a multi- sort of base operation >> mas can do that >> right >> that's what Trump is talking about >> like Djibouti >> right >> if that happens uh of course there's going to be you know balance of power and there'll be a tilt >> right and I I'm just going to digress a little bit what's your take on why that is happening why why are British essentially allowing this to happen. Is isn't the UK essentially a vassal state

18:35 of the US? How could they why is this fight even taking place? Um I mean there is a significant amount of fear. I can use that word fear because certain countries have not given statements about this war. They have been still silent. I mean oppositions and other parties are saying why aren't they talking directly? What's going on? >> Right. Um there is fear because it's a very reactive as well as u the foreign policy of uh President Trump is quite difficult to uh understand because uh even in Washington we try to um articulate a position like it was at Greenland right then it moved to Iran now um so there are m like multiple

19:24 viewpoints and then there is defense documents ments which discuss about such as the um the national security strategy of United States which came out like few months ago the hemispheric defense they really only focus on the western hemisphere >> but Iran is not in the western hemisphere >> it's outside the hemisphere >> okay we understand on securing the hemisphere because of China they mentioned about the China's aggression they're coming from the Arctic okay the coming from the Arctic I've captured actually um this came from 1944 it's not It's not a recent phenomena. Um Nicholas Spikeman actually makes that uh assessment a geopolitical assessment because the closest route could be from Arctic, >> right? >> And I have worked on his uh Asiatic

20:11 Mediterranean which is a triangular it's a it's a space in ASEAN near the ASEAN the >> the South China Sea as well as the area of the heart of the Indo Pacific. That's where I worked on this particular uh book. But there's another Mediterranean. He speaks about the Arctic Mediterranean. So which is a danger zone closest route. I think that came into uh the calculation after the Ukraine invasion, >> right? and uh because Ukrainian some of the data points I think was came from them because of course Russia has become um the one of the aggressors and um so they they would that's the reason I

20:57 think the Greenland was discussed but now they are out of the hemisphere now they are basically in Iran so what I've tried to say is that um no one could uh understand the um sort of the quick reactions of u of President Trump's decisions even I don't think the strategic community is trying to find it difficult to understand where what's going to happen next. Uh that's why the the length uh duration of the war. We're not clear the when it's going to uh pull out or when is is that going to ever happen or is it going to kind of a prolonged conflict. Right. >> So these are the dangers also that we see as uh people who read uh geopolitics

21:43 from different countries and there's a fear in most of my interviews that I understood was that the fear of uh the hegemonic behavior of these big powers not only the US but also India um China. So you look at uh the expansions going on then then you have um uh areas such as um uh the trust deficit and you look at um how much do we trust these countries uh can we trust on know um working closer uh because they have created a lot of chaos. I mean I give you one reference point. Um the director general of the institute the royal institute uh I have interviewed him. So when he began the

22:29 interview he says look you have to understand the historical uh perspective of of Cambodia and so first you have to understand the geopol before you understand the geopolitical context. The historical context is that uh US carpet bombed and killed 1 million Cambodians. uh so he directly even mentions the name Henrik Casser was dying directly involved and there was the time during his death and all that so but they they were concerned of that then they were mentioning about look then another 2 million was killed by u the Cameroon >> uh so that's 3 million totally and so we have become victims we are always

23:14 victims and now we have a lot of sanctions in our country then the Chinese have come and build a port called the Ram port just like Hanto here u now they're saying that we are militarizing we are given to the Chinese and all that >> but our constitution does not allow to give to other powers but >> but we are close to China so they have kind of drifted as well as their admin their hunen as well as hunet as sort of they call it the ironclad brothers >> okay >> yeah so that's the Cambodian story. But what they're trying to say is that um then they have a reference to um US Secretary of uh uh defense or he comes to Cambodia

24:00 Austin during Biden's time. So um I asked about that visit and he said Austin came and went but he uh we had sanctions. We thought it would be reduced but then they targeted a individual who was very close to the regime. >> Interesting. >> And uh he was a businessman and all that. So they were very disappointed about that. >> Okay. >> So you see it's not nothing they're not those things are not resolving in these countries. There's a lot of tension in it and there's a huge trust deficit. So China is very easily filling that gap. >> Right. Right. So what what happens is that they come in with soft diplomacy you know um infrastructure uh as well as you know cultural diplomacy. So they they don't talk about

24:47 any that's why there's no um I think uh it was one of the former presidents who clearly mentioned US president that China has not got into any entanglements uh for many many years and that's an advantage of China because people I think in Southeast Asia they're seen as a much more matured uh sort of a foreign policy I would say ones who are handling the foreign policy Even today considering everything that the >> South China look at my if you look at my interviews most of them I mean South China Sea of course Philippines I have not covered in >> but Philippines in the later stage I went to Philippines like few months ago >> uh they do have a concern but >> even for the uprisings that right now I

25:33 mean there's this uh people's uprising against 20 billion missing the flood there so there's something called the flood projects >> so the 20 billion there's a huge corruption bracket. So, Marcos has uh appointed his own people to you know investigate and quickly arrest them. Um then there was another geopolitical um parties that the Chinese were behind this whole operation because they want to get rid of Maros right they were funding the protesters but that didn't have any uh I mean when I went there and did some interviews we try to collect some data I don't think that was the case so there was no um Chinese hand in that sort of thing but few were arrested

26:19 were connected to the regime >> a lot of western media sa shows that in the Philippines one of the biggest political divides is the China US issue that a lot of people on the ground kind of >> yeah because they are directly uh victims of this u >> the South China Sea issue as well as the >> um the fisherman's issue as well as you know that's that's a >> that's a continuous thing that happens every every month and that's I mean but China I mean now here's the interesting Uh so since they are now out of the out of the western hemisphere the US there is no guarantee that uh China uh will not I mean consider of taking Taiwan. I

27:06 mean if you look at some of the research reports in the US say it is 2027 that the whole Chinese Taiwan invasion will happen >> 100 years of the PLA. Um so one of the British uh security analysts that I met he said you know that what they happened was Iran gave sort of a a comfort to the Chinese to take over faster. Uh so there are two versions of this Taiwan thing. One is that some Chinese uh scholars I met saying we are taking too long. The more you wait more you lose the game. So I think Trump has also got this same sort of a analogy in we need to strike and we need to strike uh because you

27:52 need to control the situation. >> Are they trying to shrink the window of opportunity for the Chinese to take Taiwan? Is that >> now now it has become they not shrunk the opportunity but they have uh they have sort of created that momentum much more because they have aggravated it. >> Right. So um it could be so so that that's where the problem is. So you'd have to understand the entire uh the map. It's not just the one region but geopolitics affects multiple regions and um you see in the in the past that's why I mention um I start from the relationship we had the historical relationship >> the Sri Lanka's only military victory we

28:38 had outside was uh in a port in Myanmar a kasumi >> during our king's time in the 12th century so uh and this is called the dean inscription. We have uh inscription written in the ancient. So, so there was u uh external interventions back then and Sri Lanka has shown their force basically by naval power in Myanmar >> and we have dictated the trading rules. >> Why would we intervene at that time? >> So there was a disruption to our trade. Um so we were trading um ivory and other stuff and yeah so uh so there was a disruption and so our naval fleet had had a battle in a port called Kasumi

29:24 >> interesting >> and that's only recorded um sort of the naval battle and the victory we had so it was a power although we were middle and small power um then I think the cultural uh if you look at the the context the civilizational Sri Lanka is a civilizational power just like Cambodia was a civilizational power but all of these civilizational powers if you look at it um uh they have become poor poorer right I mean in terms of economy I mean it's about 25% uh in Sri Lanka Cambodia is about the same so um and they have become u I mean the the grandeur of the civilization >> right

30:09 >> is no more they talk about it >> I and ankad is the size almost closer to the size of Singapore. The entire temple is like I begin from that and they say like look we've done this amazing so it's the same story here >> that civilization but the two big powers are also talking uh there's a competition between India and uh China on where India speaks about bat the rise of bat and Dr. Dr. Jash Shanka's book clearly then you have um President Xi Jinping's version of Shad future as well as you know referring to the the uh you know silk road as well as um uh the voyages um of the yeah so so that's that's the um that's the Chinese

30:56 part of it uh trying to sort of u revisit the civilizational uh grandeur. So I think um what's interesting is that um well one time I was in Shian and so they were saying that uh in China and during this research so they were saying we are not 2,000 years uh old we are much more than that 2 4,000 to 5,000 we see so we are much more we had they had much more to show and they did send me to one of those museums uh to see those artifacts of the past. So what they're trying to say is that we were uh one of the you know civilized as well as one of the greatest nations that they back then but the competition is going on they're

31:43 trying to revisit that. Now if you look at uh Modi's um attempt on um the Ram mand >> you see as well as the concepts on barat and um saga maha saga it's a revisit of these >> is that part of their strategic calculus to bring about that civilizational vigor amongst the population >> so I think their strategy calculation is that uh while the west has sort of eroded this um ideas on rules based the norms and values it's been kind of deteriorated even the west is is the west who was talking about the west now if you look at um Canadian prime minister in divorce so that's the west talking about the west >> so when this is happening their

32:29 strategic calculation that's why India speaks about strategic autonomy that speak about let's discuss about you know how we could survive by own but India would be a bit disappointed of the the submarine attack >> because India has partnership with Limoa and Kasa those are the military agreements that they have on logistic supply and so when you sign with um I mean Sri Lanka has something called access and the cross exchange agreement so when you have agreements and when you have collaborations you of course give the idea of those agreements is to give provisions um on logistic supply when there's a crisis especially you have to open our ports as well as airports for US military for logistic supply Sri Lanka has signed it. So a lot of people

33:17 are unaware of this. Yeah. So what happened was AXA was signed by Gautabi Raja Pakubin was def secretary defense. Then uh it was extended by um city center during his regime uh without signing another document. There was another document called the status force agreement but he didn't want to sign that >> right >> that if you signed that would have been bit uh trickier than the AXA but AXA gives basic for example now there's distress in the Indian Ocean according to what I have read and what I've seen in the AXA document there is a clause saying when there's distress you need to provide the logistic supply basically they will be pay >> right >> but the bases as well as not B I mean

34:04 the airports and the ports. So that's something. So India signed a much lengthy one which is Kasa Limboa. So why I said India would be worried is because India takes the Indian Ocean as their strategy calculation. >> I mean they even use the phrase net security provider. >> So when it comes to net security provider that means they they need to know what's going on in the ocean. Um okay one justification is that they're all out war and I mean but still you're a partner and you are closer. uh but so that's where there are few references why this partnership I kind of I saw it because I was writing from Washington while traveling then I saw like um kind

34:52 of disruptions between us as well as the uh Indian partnership >> uh in terms of security side >> so that became a bit dangerous like the Canada operation they had the assassinations >> then they had a New York attempt >> um So but problem was the Indian side they were promoting these people. So when when uh the can Canada thing happened uh when he was deported >> the Canadian government deported u after the they were found >> the the the three guys that they accused of >> so one guy was promoted as the head of the intelligence. >> So now he's the head of it. So the problem is so I found like okay how would the US read this? Yeah. Yeah.

35:39 >> So I mean the there is I mean although we see in the media as well that you know okay that you know shaking hands and all these a sign limo sign. So no it doesn't work like that. >> Yeah >> there are many sides you need to look. >> So that's why Sri Lanka needs to sort of uh see that the larger regional picture. We don't do that. We never calculate the larger picture when it comes to foreign policy. Now we we for example we made a statement saying no no no Chinese research vessels in Sri Lanka. We said uh first we had a moratorum >> then we said we have a uh SOP um which is um uh operating procedure um uh we will introduce a standard oper

36:26 standard operating procedure as where is it? See, we say it but the document is still missing from about about two years now. We said it >> but why is this not happening? And that I think that kind of gets to my first point of if you have no leverage or value then you can't actually make commit to making decisions that give you flexibility right because if we did put that moratorium and an SOP then China will come and like make the government's life miserable and yeah so on and so forth for each great power. Is that not true? >> No. If you're saying it, we need to we need to do that properly. So if you we saying we are having a SOP, then the SOP needs to come out at least within a year's time. That's what I'm saying. If you're saying it, you need to do it. But

37:12 then if that document, >> we need to draft that document. >> Okay. >> Okay. Standard operating procedure is when a ship comes, a Sri Lankan Navy is going to go and inspect the ship. We're going to see any equipments that are detrimental to our security. >> And if that is the case, we're going to reject it. So that's the procedure. But are we in a position to do that? >> Yeah. >> So we have to get into all the not only Chinese, it's going to be all the ships. You can't target the Chinese because absolutely I mean so it's going to be all ships. >> Uh so the research vessels to to check those equipments as do we have that capacity to do that and how are we going to do it with whose assistance we're going to do it. >> So I don't think this documents ever is going to come out. Even if it comes out it's going to be kind of a very loose

37:57 end document. But the problem is that um you see the there was a issue of India's security when the Chinese vessels were coming here and uh the research vessels. So they were saying these hybrid vessels they were used for dual I mean many US uh security documents have that >> saying that Chinese use for hybrid activity >> but you need to find the authenticity. I mean this is really happening. So I mean we don't we don't need to be a victim but we can always strike I mean to have a balance like okay we all all research vessels are welcome to Sri Lanka then these are the standards that we have for example um like the US agreement that we

38:45 didn't sign >> um now one of the reasons we gave observations for that particular document the status of force agreement so some of the issues like uh which the US was ready to adjust like using our frequency when their ships come and when there so they want to use one of our frequencies. So the so that you know we might say okay we can't do that but we would be able to do something else the alternative. So rather than being passive actor and you know just saying no like for example like the like the fake fear you create like MCC millennium challenge corporation >> I can tell you about that that know that's been clearly documented as well as I have highlighted. So when the MCC came to Sri Lanka Millennium um challenge corporation fund $480 million

39:34 it was a grant >> we didn't accept it uh based on a committee that was appointed by the former president Gautab Rajapaku he said there's the committee said there was a going to be a huge national security problem and actually national security issue and you know and there was other discussions about it and they made it a hyped up issue >> uh even even the uh present government who was um back then >> made a huge uproar. >> So at the same time we were giving observations to Sri Lanka as an independent research institute. I was heading the um I was the director general of the institute of national security studies at that time. So Nepal was also given the same amount >> okay >> $450 to $60 million. So one of my

40:20 researchers who were working uh he was a very close friend of mine. He called me and said uh do you see any security threat that they've been hyped up in the media in your documents in your research? I said no this is all rubbish. It's clearly I don't see a US invasion coming. Number one they have drawn a corridor also from Trinko to Colbo saying the US military is going to come by >> come boots on the ground. >> Ports on the ground. Then there was um there was a CIA whole thing was going to come and all that. It's all rubbish because uh you see you don't need to you don't invite CIA. They usually come >> uninvited. Yeah. They don't knock on the door. >> Yeah. So so the thing is um so Nepal accepted it with protest and all that

41:07 but they did accept it. So they managed to benefit from that while Sri Lanka rejected it >> right >> uh saying it's a national security issue and all that. So these are the things I mean so if you don't uh calculate it properly then you would lose a lot as well as um I mean so we need that sort of strength to have that strength you need the capacity to do it even the SOP or the other stuff like for example the MOUS you sign with other countries that's how you get entangled >> right yeah because you have too many different deals and variables with too many different players. >> Exactly. So the players are interested in Sri Lanka because of the geopolitical of course the location and the geostrategic uh uh I mean it's been

41:53 there from the ancient history I mean if you look at my first volume the Sri Lanka at crossroads where I discuss about you know starting from time the in the interest of the location has been there it's not a this period if you take it yes I mean barri you can say bar in the Pacific period our lives right then you might have another period But the location of geography does not change. So that that's where the interest is. >> So I think the uh so I think you need to understand that our people talks about I think knows about the geostrategic location the importance >> but they don't know how to deal with the actors >> you see the the powerful actors >> the middle powers. >> So you don't we always look at the the

42:39 powerful actors right? What about the others >> like the Gulf States? Yeah, there's so many the middle powers. >> Uh you can do a lot of work with Thailand, you can do a lot of work in Cambodia, you know, the other powers, I mean Indonesia, um many countries. So I think um so our foreign policy needs to be sort of more broader in our approach and you need to have a some sort of clarity in what we do, >> right? >> Like what Mrs. Bandana did. Yeah. I mean she took I mean those are those are visionary work uh like the um you know zone of peace and all that you were right to say that you know all I mean diagazia all these people are coming at that time but see there was an attempt

43:25 now even now we can't do anything for to this war right so what we could do is as a region we can work together to secure our our nations as well as our uh ocean space those are attempts that we can I mean internationally we can take as well as the global south there's a huge uh discourse about it >> right >> and back in the day we we played I would say a leadership role the global south when it comes to band and all that um so those are important I think we need to work with with all all powers but then rather than being hostile now one interview I uh captured when I start the Sri Lankan chapter the last one uh is from the former foreign minister Ali

44:10 Sabri. So uh he was on record when was doing capturing data on that particular so he said that his president Gautab Raja Paka was getting instructions from India. >> Yep. Yeah. I you mentioned this at your book launch also and I was I was I I don't I think it was you one of your speakers and I was really taken aback. Yeah. See I so I as a researcher find it also hard to I mean uh digest that. Yeah. >> Right. Number one and it's wrong to accuse India also in everything that all our faults and all. I mean if you read this it's not a critical book about India number one or it's not a critical book about any country. It's about understanding their own vulnerabilities

44:55 own issues and how these countries look at the big powers. >> Um so this is the foreign minister and these are people who had power in their hand. So these are not ordinary people. I mean talking to a taxi driver in Cambodia was a different story. This is the foreign minister. Then also the I interviewed the former president. Uh so I compare him with Hassina. >> Okay. >> So Hassina um basically says the same thing that it was um the US was behind uh you know of orchestrating her removal. >> Sure. And Iran Khan in Pakistan. Khan and so so Gotabia mentions the same thing in my interview that it was a external hand and it was not their own

45:40 doing but look at how the other countries uh view that view I mean their perspectives like Cambodia agrees on like okay that was an external force >> but Vietnam doesn't >> well some of the Viet most of them they would say that uh it's their own making you know they didn't know how to do the I mean >> you had a fertilizer issue So it was not the it was not the west who was behind it and >> absolutely. >> Yes. I mean this is very pra I see uh Vietnam is very pragmatic in their approach. >> I mean that's why they're having a growth rate 8.5%. >> Yeah. >> Um so while some countries were having I went for one of those conferences it's called the color revolution conference. It was very interesting. >> So there was Russians there and there

46:26 was like people said what's going on? I said no the 1944 the rimland is taken over >> so it's like I mean so people are talking about it right >> although you don't laugh at it uh >> I mean Washington if you talk about it you wonder like >> either it's conspiracy or what's going on but but in the US also you have some a bit of conspiracy now I mean your president is talking about deep state you know all this kind of >> they've seen things who knows >> exactly so it's like a mixed um baggage given to you right I to ordinary people. Just imagine like how do you I mean we find it difficult to kind of go into detail and find out okay these are the what these people are talking the people who are in power and

47:12 >> and then look at the amount of disinformation as well as um information I mean some of those clearly are narrated because of their own personal uh political gains. Yeah, >> they lost of course they lost power clearly >> and then um but it's it's important to understand how they propel uh nationalistic sentiments in those countries sometimes which becomes a serious uh I would say um issue for the development of a country or you know to I mean you moving out of that secular space right so you're trying to sort of propagate the hyped up nationalist

47:57 agenda to come back to power or I you've seen you look at the region you will see that so if our people understand that better like what's going on in the region and >> sure >> they will be much more sort of you know savvy to understand okay this is happening there also this is the same thing these bunch of people are trying to you know orchestrate the same thing so that's where we need to go okay >> I think Vietnam has has has got understanding that's why I said like we don't want to even uh lease our ports. Who wants to do that? That's that's old school, you know. >> Yeah. >> So, we want technology, >> right? Knowledge sharing. >> Knowledge sharing technology. We manufacture chips. Um while um some other countries were you know uh much

48:45 more focused on other areas like the um uh belt and road or like you know infrastructure. >> Um yeah. So it's it's kind of a mixed I would say baggage. >> So actually I want to kind of discuss you um as you just mentioned the belt and road and you also mentioned strap um which is basically essentially the great power competition and long story short it says it's inevitable that these powerful actors will act rationally and we'll end up at war. So considering that considering where we are you one interesting part you mention in the book in chapter one regarding the belt and road is we always talk about the debt

49:30 trap and then you have one school that right I think rightly argues that we are not indebted to China as much as we are with the ISPs and international capital markets. So that's a very convenient narrative for the west to talk about the debt trap. But you mentioned in your book that it's um a strategic trap >> where they kind of uh penetrate your political and elite class >> and that Washington is not as concerned about that and they seem hyperfocused on the monetary debt trap aspect of this. >> Yeah. >> Um but in order to get to the monetary debt trap, you must have strategic capture of the political class first. And I think you argue that China does

50:16 that very very well. >> Correct. >> Um but then again by Gota and all these guys own admission the CIA does that too. >> Yeah. >> So what is Sri Lanka's solution to the strategic trap that these great powers inflict on an elite class? >> I think first thing is to understand this is a really good question that you had. You formulated it quite well. um you need to understand when it's coming to your country. Number one, for example, like I give one good example is the the lengthy interview I had with the former president. So he said my network was captured, right? That's what he said. But then he said, okay, how was it captured? Then he said, uh different different I mean it's like different

51:02 sets of uh ideas coming, right? >> Contradictory >> contradictory doesn't matter. But uh if the strategic trap is coming in, strategic trap has uh three areas where I have discussed. One is uh capturing u the political parties right funding political parties. Then you have um going into the the elites of the country and the military. >> So all three dimensions if you look at it in countries I've written a paper on the strategic trap. It was published in N US National University of Singapore. um clearly mention how the data uh that I've got on visits by uh certain I mean if you look at different countries and

51:48 then also funding um so the former president sees that um that it was the US who was part of that whole strategy in some other country you will say it was China who doing the same thing >> and um so it's important that we understand if there is a strategic dimension to any project for example Hanto now you're given for 99 years lease >> y >> uh then you have a prime minister who's coming and saying that oh it's not 99 uh I quoted him u former prime minister Dinhunad >> right I think I have it it's n it's 99 but can go on for another 99 >> something like that >> so look at that statement so you won't

52:33 get a statement like that from uh like in the US right I mean you won't get a statement from another you know a country like Singapore >> just imagine a Singapore minister comes and say oh hold on no it's not 99 it can go on >> yeah that would be headlines everywhere in the world >> it won't the reason it won't is because they're aware of what they're doing they understand the strategic depth of uh certain projects that they get into here is something like this like we um for example now the port Right. Um some would argue saying it's going to be a place for money laundering other stuff and you know various other activities then I see that special economic zone it's done in few other countries also the same I see the same pattern that the China has done but we

53:21 wanted this project right we have we have advocated we wanted it that's what the Chinese are saying you wanted it we did the projects now you're blaming us which is not fair. >> Yeah. So I think um you need to understand that's why the strategic depth of what we really want as a nation that I don't think we have now we build matala >> the time I was they build matala I was the director of Lakshm kadriam institute so when I have why you need the second airport in the south >> one answer was that uh you know Bangkok uh there's a one airport in Bangkok there's another one in Phuket >> okay so this is this is this is exact what I And I I've captured that also in one of my writings. There's a very senior person in the government who said

54:07 that. So okay here is so Bangkok is there then you have Phuket and what we have it. He asked me I said Puket is different to Ham. So >> they'll justify anything right any >> so you try to justify without any strategic depth or any any sort of strategic thinking but now here at least you need national planning right this is about national planning. is not even about strategic thinking. is about I mean you need to understand okay if these people are going to convert things to military assets or you know that's the strategic part that should come from the foreign ministry but national planning right so when it comes to national planning if you look at 1978 we abolished the national planning committee >> that was where the intellectuals like Godfrey you know Mada right all of these

54:54 top people who was there then um professor Gasakra so everybody that that's a space where planning and that was also abolished in 1978. Unfortunately, they tried to bring it back in 19th amendment u bringing back in several but they never bought it back. I don't know why that's a bit that's a good question that I I think somebody needs to I've been ask trying to ask why can't we bring this committee back >> right >> because that's that's the space where academics >> research inputs and everybody can you know uh get into planning of a country. Now here the planning there's a planning department which allocates budgets that's not planning there I'm talking about you know planning like the makala case that I mentioned do we really need

55:40 it if the politician really wants to do that you know another airport like Phuket >> uh there should be a committee saying rejecting it saying you know your thinking is wrong that's how the other countries work >> now Singapore also has something called the futures office right the the prime minister has something called the future futures thinkers which is the futures input is taken always >> right >> so they even look at a project not for 10 years or 20 years but for 30 to 40 you know long term because that airport would be not feasible maybe in several years time >> sure absolutely >> so that's long-term thinking >> right >> so what when the planning committee was there you did have some sort of thing abolish for a reason at that time back in the 78 um maybe because open economy

56:26 and you know they wanted to play it in a maybe a maybe a different it was a different moment so I wouldn't know why exact reason for abolishing it but it was an important uh committee to I think to revisit um so when it comes to strategic thinking yes you need that side also um because some projects you might want to take national uh security clearances um because in terms of uh you know I mean there is a long-term plan like even hanto um like I mentioned about I compared with two data sets right rand data and aid data >> I mean there is no indication say that the Chinese are coming with you know they're militarizing this place there is

57:11 nothing like that up to now but a data says yes there is a bit of a slight danger there right so it might come after Djibouti >> right so isn't that kind of the argument that right now it always starts off with an investment gets into a commercial thing and they understand that okay depending on the government in Sri Lanka the sentiment whether it's 10 20 30 40 years down the line then when the opportunity comes they will capture it and make it military >> so that's where again the strategic trap comes in right so if it's easy to capture the political elites or and also if it's easy to penetrate into political parties so it comes from of course funding channels >> and uh I mean when you look at the patterns of other countries that's what I'm Okay. So people need to have that um

58:00 um sort of strategic depth. The leaders need to have that. You see the vision has to be um like I remember one more one incident where Gotab makes a phone call with President Xi and I've I've documented that he said we after the phone call he says that I want to follow the Chinese development model. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So you see, so it's just a phone call. >> Yeah. And he just changed his like tune. >> No, there's a danger in um when you don't have that strategic sort of depth. Um then then one point of his interview he says I was too democratic and this is what happened. Was it excuse I was democratic and I gave them to protest. I

58:46 gave them all that. I was too democratic. I think um maybe I did not have the that kind of a balance properly of We all wish he was less democratic. Yes absolutely. >> Yeah. Interesting. >> Yeah. The the whole inter interview was more than hours. So, but I only captured one line and that that became um the u >> kudos to you as for a straight face during that interview like really kudos to you. >> Yeah. But but you see the the problem is they start blaming their own um own issues like own faults what they have done even like even removing me from the position it came to the cabinet then he said I don't do that sort of stuff it must be you know one of my advisers and

59:32 all that but you see there is there is um inconsistency in terms of when it comes to policies and as well as professionalism that's where it's tracking and uh when you look at other countries where they have some sort of uh that's how you win the investors also what I found in Vietnam I asked about corruption in Vietnam this very interesting he said inside the government machinery we make sure that the cor corruption is very less >> and we have try to that's the reason a lot of people trust and bring the money as well as you know the investments are flowing into the country so that's something that Sri Lanka would need to build because what you have is a case. I mean if you look at the IMF diagnostic

1:00:19 which I was part of that document uh was a technical advisor to IMF advising on so it clearly mentions how much the the depth of corruption the issues and you know the and also the institution how weak the institutions were >> right >> so if you don't have the strength of that you will have a strategic trap very easily >> and I guess the best is the best strategic trap is the institutions rather than the individuals Right. >> Yeah. If the institutions are weak, then you don't need the institutions to make those decisions. Right. That's where it is. It's the individual. >> Fair enough. >> Individuals will take that. >> Fair enough. I get that. Yeah. >> And uh even in foreign policy calculation not a one man's job, right? I mean I can give an input. It can be

1:01:05 debated. It can be discussed. >> It can be taken in. But there's a lot of where United States that's where I I have one uh area where I have a sort of an argument with Kishom Bubani who was my teacher. >> Okay. >> The LKY he says um US is falling and China is rising >> and at that time was 78 years ago when he wrote his book. Um so I had a count a different uh idea because I didn't agree with that that the US was falling because the structures of US is very strong even now. >> Correct. >> So presidents come for a very shorter time. >> Sure. >> Then but the structures are really really strong. I mean if you look at their departments the structures the

1:01:51 planning um they're not that weak and although we see it as uh you know but it can always reset US has done the the amazing part that the other countries are you see China has learned this art uh one of the reason see everybody blames the US but everybody wants to go to US they don't want to go and live in China or even our former presidents who are very critical they don't they can live there But they don't want to go there. >> Absolutely. >> The reason is they know that that place has structures because you don't need to work at the highest level or the second level. There are structures that >> in every level >> every level your health is looked after >> your other uh you know sort of and also the strategic planning when it comes

1:02:36 that's where I'm involved in the research side extremely strong. I mean look at tell me another city in the world which has 220 think tanks right? So Washington has 220 think tanks. There's no other city. So if you look at uh okay they may produce different different narratives, different um independent thinking but there is uh strength in the structures. So I don't agree on falling. You see US is falling and then another rise and they might reduce the the the perception of the US is is quite weak because of these wars and all that >> but there's always a comeback. >> Well you speak you you speak of the US in terms of being spiritually exhausted.

1:03:21 So isn't that part of that decline? >> Yeah. So if you look at it now um you have high inequality in the society. you have um many uh it's it's a highly polarized if you look at it like I was teaching in Kentucky one time and >> and when we go to Washington is a completely different perspective >> two different perspective so you have supporters of Trump very uh strong Republican base then you have the democrat base but very polarized their TV stations are also I tried to understand I couldn't understand at all I mean the first year like I watch Fox then I watch the other side Right. Yeah. Yeah. So we I mean we look I mean when you go it's quite uh as a Sri Lankan um then you have a large Indian diaspora

1:04:07 also um which speaks about the region. U then then what I understood was the first year when I was working in Washington that um India needs to give space to other voices like the surrounding countries. Um so that's something um that that's a limitation that I saw a big limitation from India. So the surrounding countries if you look at it there's not a single director like from Bangladesh and Nepal or like from Maldives um so the it's it's a Indian version of the South Asia always of course India is large India diaspora is large agree but the reason that I found that now that's very interesting when I was traveling to

1:04:53 the region and going to these countries like Nepal um Bangladesh and all this is the same uh The reason that I found that they had a problem with the the center which is the India >> u that's why I I I bring up that question that India needs to >> rather than India saying India is great that others need to say India is great >> you can do that you can do that you see there was times that um surrounding countries like during uh the ancient time of course the king ass you can make uh because our cultures are very close interconnected. >> Uh here is a kind of a deep suspicion. Um then there is okay because of them we

1:05:39 are in this state. >> It's not fully because of them. I mean of course they try to help like India was the first country to come and uh rescue the country. They give large amount of money >> close to 4 billion. >> Yeah. That was a lifesaver. >> Yeah. That's and before IMF came. >> Yeah. So that's why so there should be appreciation there should be I mean of course uh we have worked together in many issues we can work together as a region and Sri Lanka can play a big role because Sri Lanka does not have direct borders um I mean Maldives uh we look at the strategic thinking it's still I mean we look at the research side uh they have not I think they have probably one uh research agency but still they are under development but you see Sri Lanka has

1:06:25 got that face and Sri Lanka from the history we have that uh momentum created on the foreign policy looking at the larger picture of things >> can play a bigger role because you can bring in actors who are fighting with India together I mean India Pakistan or others to our country speak you know >> mediate >> yeah it's a bigger role what Sri Lanka could play even Myanmar is in chaos now >> whatanma when I basically I've written about the belt and door the issues that they're having. There's a huge uh resource deposit in Kashin state. They're fighting over the mineral resource. There are a lot of issues there. It's like a civil war, prolonged civil war. We had a civil war for three decades.

1:07:11 >> We can help them. Myanmar and Sri Lanka has lot of historical relationship, Buddhist connection. >> There's so much. If you look at um one of the arguments that I bring to the reader is that u one of the Israeli scholars were telling me that um you see my my thinking on India and China getting together is not going to happen. It's it's you know that's you're not you're going in a different direction which is a direction that you never it's because it's two different I said no look the two civilizational states in the ancient time my reference point was to uh Nalanda >> sure >> so during the Nalanda University in the ancient times there was a Chinese scholars and Indian scholars who worked

1:07:56 together on translating Buddhism working together >> interesting >> so that was a moment that was happening You see uh so the argument now is that no it's not going to happen. >> Yeah. Don't you think that moment is far far that ship has sailed though any possibility of two these two civilizational entities in the past they have worked together that's the thing civilization states have worked together in the present modern day um if you look at it it's less I would say but is there a moment uh again spikman has mentioned that but he has draw drone axis between Russia and China so that's a dangerous access he said that if this if they get together then you're looking at a so that's the axis right now what he has

1:08:44 seen after the second world war and um and he also had some reference to Japan importance of Japan >> and how how they need to be closer to US uh per so these are all in the strategic map >> okay >> so what you have to understand is that civilizational states can work together I mean we can for example look at the border disputes we did resolve like to some extent we had the tension we resolved I mean the two countries uh which is good I mean for Asia and two large markets right I mean if you look at the trade volumes has been growing um and trade volumes and both of them have two strategies that's why I mentioned like this is Chinese strategy this is the Indian strategy for Southeast Asia

1:09:30 >> okay so look at >> and you talk about that deeply in your book >> then I go to the the past also okay this is sansu this is chanaka Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. Here is it. This is I mean they use the same same >> it's the same fundamental core like strategic value. Yeah. >> So obviously one is ahead of the game because China is ahead of the game. Uh it started early the dashanka clearly mentions this in his book. >> The reason that India's behind is China started early. had that vision of Benjing and um so that transformation as well as u then there's another argument which is very interesting saying that um so the foreign secretary of former

1:10:16 foreign secretary of India says that no no no it was you who built uh uh China that was the United States who built China >> and but there is a lot there is

…