Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath signals principled continuity in Colombo’s Middle East policy as Muslim civil society hails new era of inclusivity
(Lanka-e-News -30.April.2025, 11.30 PM) In the ornate conference chamber of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Colombo, the air was thick not with ceremony but with sincerity. For a country often accused of retreating into parochialism or majoritarian rhetoric, today’s meeting was quietly historic.
Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, flanked by Deputy Speaker Rizvi Salie and Member of Parliament M.S.M. Aslam, addressed a room of over 30 Muslim civil society leaders. What emerged was more than a public relations gesture — it was a policy recalibration, a signal that Sri Lanka’s new administration, under President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, intends to walk a careful diplomatic and domestic tightrope rooted in pluralism and principle.
In the most widely quoted line of the day, Herath reaffirmed that Sri Lanka would “maintain its unwavering diplomatic support for the rights of the Palestinian people”, calling it a position of “moral constancy” and “historical obligation.”
The meeting, modest in scale but symbolic in scope, comes amid a shifting geopolitical and domestic landscape. Sri Lanka, emerging from an unprecedented economic collapse and political upheaval, is attempting to rebuild both trust at home and credibility abroad.
At home, Muslim civil society remains bruised by years of discriminatory rhetoric, marginalisation, and violent pogroms — notably the anti-Muslim riots of 2018 and 2019. Internationally, Sri Lanka’s voice has long echoed in favour of Palestinian self-determination at the United Nations, but critics have noted a lack of recent public commitment.
The meeting, according to participants, sought to address both.
“After years of being sidelined, we finally feel seen,” said Fazlul Ameen, an Islamic scholar and community leader from Kattankudy. “We came here not to demand privilege, but to ask for equity. And we heard a message of justice — both local and global.”
The Foreign Minister, known more for ideological sobriety than rhetorical flourish, anchored his remarks in themes of national unity, equal justice, and international consistency.
“Let there be no doubt,” Herath said, “this government will not tolerate sectarianism, racism, or supremacist ideologies. The law will be applied equally. And our foreign policy will not be dictated by transient alliances but by enduring values.”
On the question of Palestine, Herath was unequivocal.
“Sri Lanka's commitment to the Palestinian cause is not opportunistic. It is not performative. It is principled. From the era of SWRD Bandaranaike through Sirimavo, JR Jayewardene, and Lakshman Kadirgamar, our stance has been one of solidarity with a people denied their homeland,” he said.
He added that Sri Lanka would continue to support a two-state solution, in line with UN resolutions 242 and 338, and “oppose illegal settlements, forced evictions, and violations of international law.”
Sri Lanka’s support for Palestine is not new. The country was among the earliest in South Asia to establish full diplomatic ties with the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) in the 1970s. In 1980, Sri Lanka became one of the first Asian countries to officially recognise the State of Palestine, and the Palestinian flag has flown over a mission in Colombo for decades.
At the UN General Assembly and in forums like the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), Sri Lanka has often spoken out against Israeli occupation and supported Palestinian bids for recognition.
Yet, in recent years, Colombo’s rhetoric had quieted. There were whispers — especially during the Gotabaya Rajapaksa presidency — of a subtle pivot, influenced by closer military and economic ties with Israel and the UAE’s normalisation trend under the Abraham Accords.
Herath’s statement seems a deliberate correction.
“This is a reassertion of moral foreign policy,” said Dr. Farzana Haniffa, a political anthropologist at the University of Colombo. “It signals that Sri Lanka will not sacrifice international law or historical empathy on the altar of expediency.”
For Sri Lanka’s Muslims, who make up nearly 10% of the population, today’s meeting was also a moment of cautious hope.
In the past five years, they have faced everything from mosque attacks to discriminatory cremation laws during COVID-19. Even civil society activists found themselves under surveillance or marginalisation under the guise of ‘anti-extremism.’
“This meeting was not just about Palestine,” said Azhar Maulana, a legal advocate from Puttalam. “It was about being recognised as full citizens again.”
Foreign Minister Herath echoed this sentiment.
“We recognise the pain your community has endured. While we cannot undo history, we can commit to inclusivity, consultation, and equality as we write the next chapter.”
Critics may argue that Herath’s foreign policy pronouncements — especially on Palestine — are easier said than implemented. After all, Sri Lanka is economically dependent on Gulf remittances and is seeking strategic partnerships across both Western and Islamic blocs.
Could this statement on Palestine antagonise key trade or defence partners?
“It’s a calculated risk,” said Ambika Selvakumar, a former diplomat and analyst at the South Asia International Affairs Forum (SAIAF). “But it’s also diplomatically astute. In reaffirming Palestine, Sri Lanka strengthens ties with the OIC bloc, builds credibility in the Global South, and sends a signal to domestic minority communities.”
Moreover, in the age of multipolarity, where states often balance contradictory allegiances, Colombo’s principled stand may not draw the retaliation it once might have.
The Palestinian Mission in Colombo swiftly issued a statement thanking the government for its “steadfast friendship” and praising the Foreign Minister for “standing on the right side of history.”
In Ramallah, officials with the Palestinian Foreign Ministry noted the remarks and described Sri Lanka as “a long-standing partner in our diplomatic journey.”
By contrast, the Israeli Embassy in New Delhi, which oversees diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka, offered no immediate comment. However, sources within the Sri Lankan foreign service suggest that Colombo informed all relevant stakeholders in advance to avoid diplomatic friction.
Not all reactions were unqualified praise.
Several opposition MPs urged the government to back words with actions. “What we need is more than declarations,” said Sajith Premadasa, Leader of the Opposition. “We need votes at the UN, we need trade alignment, and we need to ensure that our solidarity translates into tangible support.”
Human rights groups also called on Sri Lanka to apply the same standards of justice at home as it professes abroad.
“Support for Palestine is welcome. But let’s not forget the injustices within our own borders,” said Ruki Fernando, a rights advocate. “Equal treatment of minorities, an end to arbitrary arrests, and protections against hate speech — these are the true tests of sincerity.”
As the meeting concluded, there were no champagne toasts or sweeping policy papers. Just handshakes, quiet conversations, and a promise of more meetings to come.
But for many in the room, it was enough.
“History is not only made in headlines,” said MP Aslam, addressing the group. “Sometimes it is made in rooms like this — when people who have long been ignored are finally heard.”
The real test lies ahead. Will Sri Lanka’s diplomatic missions continue to advocate proactively for Palestine? Will the country resist the temptations of transactional diplomacy in favour of moral consistency?
And at home, will civil society be given more than just a seat at the table — will it be offered real influence in policymaking?
Foreign Minister Herath has made his opening move. If his words are matched by follow-through, Sri Lanka may yet emerge not merely as a recovering nation, but as a principled voice in an increasingly cynical international order.
As one elderly activist put it after the meeting, walking slowly through the courtyard of the ministry:
“They buried us in silence for too long. Today, at least, we were heard. Tomorrow, we’ll see.”
-By LeN Diplomatic Correspondent
---------------------------
by (2025-04-30 19:08:47)
Read 4236 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news