Sri Lanka’s new foreign minister: it was a question of who reached for the gun first

The Foreign Minister of Sri Lanka’s new government, the legitimacy of which is shrouded in doubt, says the prime minister’s removal was constitutional.

Sarath Amunugama said the ousting would be finalised with a parliamentary vote in the new government’s favour and that the takeover was just a matter of “who reached for the gun first”.

In an interview with The National, Mr Amunugama defended the government of Mahinda Rajapaksa against accusations of the first coup in Sri Lanka’s history, bribing MPs to obtain support in parliament and delaying a vote until it has the majority it needs. “They would have done absolutely the same,” he said, referring to removed prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his supporters, who are operating a parallel government less than two kilometres away.

“They are just the guys who have not been fast on the draw.”

Mr Amunugama said Mr Wickremesinghe’s United National Party was trying to attract seven more MPs for a majority and oust its coalition partner, the party of President Maithripala Sirisena who sacked the premier after allegations of an Indian-backed assassination plot.

He downplayed the controversy over Mr Rajapaksa’s appointment, saying he had only been nominated as prime minister until he was approved by the legislature.

“Rajapaksa has to show his majority in parliament,” Mr Amunugama said.

But experts say the appointment was illegitimate and Mr Sirisena’s delay in convening parliament was to give him time to gather enough support.

“I think it’s grossly unconstitutional and undemocratic,” said Dr Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, executive director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives, a think tank in Colombo.

“Clearly, when it happened, Sirisena and Rajapaksa did not have a majority of members of parliament.

“They have taken three weeks to consolidate their hold on power and cobble together the necessary majority.” An amendment to Sri Lanka’s constitution, approved in 2015 by Mr Sirisena, removed the president’s power to sack the prime minister except under certain conditions, which critics say have not been met.

The Speaker of the Parliament, Kaya Jayasuriya, apparently felt the same way.

Yesterday Mr Jayasuriya issued his strongest statement yet, saying he would recognise only Mr Wickremesinghe as prime minister and reject Mr Rajapaksa until he showed majority support in parliament.

“It’s not up to him. Under the constitution, he has no powers to do that,” Mr Amunugama said.

To Mr Wickremesinghe’s supporters at Temple Trees, the official prime minister’s residence where he has remained, those now occupying ministries are doing so illegally.

Although the permanency of his office remains uncertain, Mr Amunugama spells out his foreign policy.

Mr Rajapaksa has been accused of being beholden to China, taking high-interest loans in return for infrastructure projects for Beijing that have solidified its influence.

China now controls a deep seaport in Mr Rajapaksa’s home town of Hambantota, giving it a dock for its navy on a 99-year lease.

Mr Amunugama said Colombo would not side with China or India, but would benefit from alliances with both, and that Hambantota was “by no means a military port”.

“We don’t lean towards anybody,” he said. “We are equidistant from India and China. There is no benefit to Sri Lanka by tilting to one side or the other.”

The Tamil minority fear the return of Mr Rajapaksa because of his repression of the community during and after the civil war that ended in 2009.

Mr Amunugama brushed off the minority’s calls for justice.

He said “almost all” of the Tamil land taken by the military had been returned, the government had appointed “missing people’s committees” and that most of those believed to be missing were Tamil Tigers “cadres who were killed in battle”.

And what now for Mr Wickremesinghe?

“He’s done. He’s done for.”