Opinion

A few days ago, I bumped into a former World Bank colleague and I asked him why it is taking the International Monetary Fund, his ‘sister’, so uncharacteristically long to announce a bailout package for Sri Lanka. His response was occultly hush-hush for the simple confirmation I sought to common knowledge. As he put it, China refuses to participate in any ‘hair-cut’.  He was referring to the losses Colombo’s debtors expect themselves to collectively underwrite to rescue Sri Lanka from its present crisis.

The international headlines made more sense to me. The IMF walked out of the talks because China balked at the suggestion that its privately agreed loans to Colombo, and the government of the day, should be written down as part of an international debt restructuring plan. The fund apparently promised to resume talks later this month if Beijing complies.

The IMF is never known for its nuance. Nor is China. In fact, only a community of similarly situated peers can fully appreciate this dilemma. Messianic belief leads both to flex their muscles in broken states like Sri Lanka and Nepal where ‘democracy’ spars with ‘authoritarianism’ to mask deep inequality, social tensions and a market dominant minority. Eventually, it is a race to the bottom.

The lesson: when we play stupid games, we win stupid prizes.

Western media reports – at least those I have come across – acknowledge that Chinese loans account for 10 percent or less of Sri Lanka’s $51 billion outstanding debt. Any sane accountant will tell you that this does not add up to much, western hype aside, to constitute the primary source of Sri Lanka’s current problems.

But western media has a habit of insulting our intelligence. It still maintains that Beijing has an outsized potential to disrupt the negotiations. Kudos, actually, to China if it really exerts leverage on this scale over the rest of the world.

But wait… even without a blink, in the very next headline, the TV news-reader describes how ready the West stands to support Ukraine’s $700 billion post-war reconstruction costs, even as Ukrainian leaders plead with the conferring non-Slav Europeans that Kiev is not yet ready to accept aid until the war with Russia ceases. But the “blue-eyed and blond-haired who look like us can never be refugees in Europe” perspective still prevails in these talks.

Clearly, time is not on Colombo’s side. As a regional neighbour, I see Sri Lanka as collateral damage – another victim of great power rivalry in South Asia: testament to the myth of ‘multilateralism’ now openly tearing apart at the seams, as well as the limits to India’s lyrically deceptive promise as a regional saviour to put its neighbourhood first policy into true effect. 

Sadly, Sri Lanka is a vivid reminder to the rest of us in the region, especially in Nepal, that our leaders have eminently positioned us to slide down the same slippery path.

Not too long ago, on social media, I cheered my Singhalese, Tamil, Buddhist, Muslim and Hindu brethren in Colombo on successfully crossing all divides in the collective quest for a better Sri Lanka. In my mind I was congratulating the many Sri Lankans I have personally befriended over many years and whose stories I am deeply familiar with. 

Today, as the situation for them turns from bad to worse – and for no fault of theirs – I am at a loss for words. But I trust I still echo most Nepalis when I say we are with you: you inspired us at the height of your economic and social achievements; you still inspire us at your lowest point in your struggles for a better tomorrow. 

Talked to Sri Lankan friends camping out for the 18th night in protests. Buddhists are hugging Muslims; Muslims are hugging Hindus, they said. Western media leads us to believe the 3 sides are irreconcilable. In a morbid, perverse way I am happy for Sri Lanka. ✌?✌?❤️❤️ pic.twitter.com/VtOuyWIoi1

— Rajib Upadhya (@RajibUpadhya) May 2, 2022