Discuss the pros and cons of India's stand on human rights issue in Srilanka.
Someone has rightly said that 'to live with peace and to protect your interest, your relation with neighbor should be healthy and strong'. India did the same thing in UNHRC voting on the Sri lanka's human right violation issue as a neighbor country, India abstained from voting against Srilanka. Its effect will be far-reaching. On earlier two occasions, India voted against Srilanka, This time it is a clear departure from earlier two. It is not in India's interest to vote against its neighbor. To save the interests and rights of people living in the northern (Tamil) province, India can put pressure on the srilankan to do so. Buy holding elections in the Northern Province, sri lanka has done much of it. This decision was India's boldest expression of external policy in recent years.
India has an old policy of not voting in country specific resolution, especially against a neighbor. Earlier stands of India against srilanka in 2012 and 2013 (CHOGM) were because of UPA govt's Allies like DMK etc. they were to withdraw support from UPA govt. and fear of violence breakout in the south of the country.
The reason of abstention from voting on resolution was also because of the language of resolution itself. The setting up of an 'international enquiry mechanism' is a departure from the texts of the past. The resolution seems to follow a dual principle: exhorting srilanka to adopt the findings of lesions learnt and reconciliation commission (LLRC) and at the time ordering another enquiry into the same allegations. If the LLRC is constructive and noteworthy, then why there is need for another investigation. Instead it could have proposed punitive measures against srilanka govt., until it adopts and acts on the LLRC's recommendations.
By this, India has succeeded in pressurizing srilanka to held election in the Northern Province, through PM manmohan singhs numerous meetings with srilankan leadership. Srilanka has shown the sign of improvement by doing this. India has to maintain good relation with srilanka to provide rights to the people of Northern Province, to withdraw army from the province and to provide a healthy environment and ensure security of people from human rights violation in future.
Criticism of India's abstention include that being a regional leader of 1.3 billion people, it should have voted a firm 'yes or no'. it is like 'a few step forward and now several backward' for its record on human rights.
To protect the human rights of Tamils in srilanka, it is necessary to maintain good relation with the srilankan leadership, which is possible only through healthy relationship between India and srilanka. Going against srilanka in UNHR resolution would have negative consequences on both the relations of India of srilanka and on Tamils in srilanka. India, with srilankan govt. should ensure human right and development in the northern (Tamil) province. Only in this manner the interest of people in Northern Province can be protected.
- Pros and cons of India's stand on human rights issue in Srilanka
- Current issues between india and sri lanka
- Recent developments in india-sri lanka relations
- india sri lanka relations insights