SRI LANKA: COMPROMISE ON DEVOLUTION SHOWS SIGNS OF

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001127

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR SCA/INS
MCC FOR D NASSIRY AND E BURKE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/15/2017
TAGS: PGOV PREL PTER PHUM MOPS CE
SUBJECT: SRI LANKA: COMPROMISE ON DEVOLUTION SHOWS SIGNS OF
UNRAVELING

REF: COLOMBO 1103 (AND PREVIOUS)

Classified By: Ambassador Robert O. Blake, Jr. Reasons: 1.4(b, d).


1. SUMMARY: The deal the President put together on
devolution (reftel) has come under fire from Sinhalese
hardliners, delaying its approval for at least several days,
perhaps much longer. The radical Sinhalese Buddhist
monk-based party Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) objected to the
compromise, insisting on the "unitary" character of the Sri
Lankan state. Other parties in the governing coalition have
also raised last-minute objections to All-Party
Representative Committee (APRC) chair Tissa Vitharana's
attempt at a final draft. According to media reports by some
opposition-oriented newspapers, the President has suspended
the APRC indefinitely. Vitharana told Ambassador on August
15, however, that he hoped to reconvene the APRC by August 20
and get the process back on track. Sri Lankan Muslim
Congress leader Rauff Hakeem told Ambassador that the process
was temporarily on hold, but he expected the President to
raise the matter with leaders of the coalition parties,
perhaps on the margins of the August 15 Cabinet meeting.
Hakeem was hopeful that the President would show leadership
and "move towards the center" on devolution. End summary.


2. (C) The President's compromise proposal on devolution
(reftel) has come under fire from the JHU who represent a key
constituency of President Rajapaksa's political base. On
August 15, the day set by the main opposition United National
Party (UNP) as a deadline for wrapping up the APRC's work,
media sources close to the opposition reported that the deal
had fallen apart, and that the President had suspended the
APRC indefinitely. In fact, the monk-based JHU and other
small parties represented in the coalition have objected to
various aspects of APRC chair Vitharana's "final" draft. The
JHU took issue with a new formulation by Vitharana referring
to a "single" state, insisting that the character of the
state remain "unitary." (Note: the compromise worked out by
the Presidnt also had retained the "unitary" terminology.
Vitharana's latest, well-intentioned attempt to soften this
seems to have backfired.) The Up-Country People's Front
(UPF),one of two parties representing Indian-origin Tamils,
dissented on the grounds that any solution to the country's
ethnic conflict needed to go even further than devolution to
the province. The tiny left-wing party MEP objected to the
abolition of the executive presidency in favor of a
British-style parliamentary model. A breakaway faction of
the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) said it preferred
devolution to the district level.


3. (C) The leader of the mainstream SLMC, Rauff Hakeem, was
concerned but did not think the situation as dire as
portrayed in the opposition media. He told Ambassador on
August 15 that the President had now put the APRC process on
hold so that he could consult with the leaders of the parties
making up his coalition. He thought it likely that the JHU
had engineered the latest "hiccup" in the process. Hakeem
believed the President was "worked up" about the never-ending
debate about whether to substitute a "Westminster model" for
the current executive presidency. He believed the President
was overly solicitous of the views of the JHU, a relatively
minor player in Sri Lankan politics. He hoped the President
would continue to "move toward the center," rather than
pander to the JHU's radical Sinhalese nationalist views.
Hakeem also worried that the recurring idea of consulting the
mostly Sinhalese south in a referendum about elements of the
devolution plan before any negotiations with the LTTE or
other Tamil groups was unworkable.


4. (C) APRC chair Tissa Vitharana cast the most recent delay
in a more favorable light. He explained to Ambassador that
he had submitted one more draft incorporating the most recent

COLOMBO 00001127 002 OF 002


changes (ref A) to the APRC. However, two of the parties in
the APRC (comment: probably the JHU and the MEP) were not
prepared to continue discussions at this point, saying they
needed to refer back to their party leaders. Vitharana told
us that he planned tentatively to reconvene the APRC on
August 20 with a view to ironing out the last-minute
differences. He added that far from trying to keep the UNP
out of the process, he wanted to draw the opposition back in
to the discussion, and had so informed the press.


5. (C) COMMENT: The UNP continues to seek a temporary
advantage by throwing a monkey wrench into the APRC process,
and may well try to use the expiration of their August 15
deadline as an excuse not to re-engage. On the other hand,
some of the minor parties in the coalition, by constantly
re-opening settled issues, also seem intent on blocking a
consensus. Nevertheless, there appears to be a great deal of
common ground, shared by parties both in the government and
in the opposition, which together represent a huge majority
in the Parliament. Embassy will again weigh in discreetly
with the major players involved - primarily the President's
Sri Lankan Freedom Party and the UNP - to urge them to set
aside their partisan jockeying for the good of the country.
BLAKE