The Hon. Kabir Hashim

¶ 01 Hon. Speaker, these days among our youth there are frequent discussions. They often ask, “What is American imperialism?” The usual answer they get is that before the JVP Government started dealing with the IMF, they would say “Yankee imperialism.” Then they ask, what is Indian expansionism? Indian expansionism, they say, was the Indian hegemonic thinking that India followed before the JVP, including Mr. Tilvin, started working closely with India. That is the popular narrative in the villages today.

¶ 02 The JVP, for 40 years, as a political force, acted with a strong belief in socialism, Leninism and Marxism, taking strong positions against American imperialism and neo-colonialism. We respected them then for being steadfast despite pressure. But after becoming the Government, the JVP cannot even make a strong statement about those policies. Where do you stand today? Are you working as an instrument of imperialists and neo-colonialists? That is the question. As a Government, your statements and decisions raise questions.

¶ 03 Hon. Speaker, how did this war situation arise? While talks and dialogues were ongoing, and when Iran had not taken any provocative action, Israel attacked Iran first. At a time when Oman's Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi, who was leading the dialogue, announced that a settlement was close, the next day Israel struck. Moreover, the UK’s “The Guardian” reported that at the February talks in Geneva between the United States and Iran, Jonathan Powell, the British security adviser, noted that Iran had proposed suspending its nuclear programme and argued there was no need for war, though the UK later said Powell was not there in an official capacity, he had participated.

¶ 04 Hon. Speaker, The Guardian of 17th March, 2026, states: “The UK saw no compelling evidence of an imminent threat of an Iranian missile attack on Europe...” It further states: “Instead the UK regarded the attack as unlawful and premature since Powell believed the path remained open to a negotiated solution...”

¶ 05 In such a context, it is clear who the aggressor is. Sri Lanka must be extremely cautious and diplomatic. I believe the Government understands that we must be neutral. But are we? I saw in the media that the President had a phone conversation with the Emir of Qatar; “Qatar Tribune” reported that the President expressed solidarity with Qatar “on the ongoing Iranian aggression affecting Qatar and the wider region.” Does this mean Sri Lanka accepts there is “Iranian aggression”? Does it tacitly or explicitly support the US-Israeli war on Iran? Are we taking a side? The Opposition needs clarity on where our Foreign Policy is headed.

¶ 06 Today, the main crisis facing the country is foreign policy confusion. The position we take is vital to minimize the impact on Sri Lanka. After Independence, our leaders elevated the country’s reputation through foreign policy: J.R. Jayewardene’s “Hatred is not appeased by hatred” at San Francisco; Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace; and mediating in the Indo-China conflict, enhancing Sri Lanka’s standing. We do not see such statesmanship in the current foreign policy.

¶ 07 Questions also arise as to why permission to enter our waters for Iran’s first ship was delayed for 11 hours, while the second ship was facilitated. The Foreign Minister must clarify. Technically, we appreciate rescuing survivors and recovering bodies from the first vessel and escorting the second to safety. But the 11-hour delay raises concerns of humanitarian-law obligations under UNCLOS. As a neutral State, did we need any external consultation before such operations? What does “Net Security Provider” mean for Sri Lanka in this Indian Ocean context? Did the Government compromise sovereign decision-making? The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism should inform the House how we are maintaining neutrality, given conflicting local and international reports.

¶ 08 This episode also exposes gaps in our maritime security planning. Our foreign policy posture will affect how our country is placed and impacted economically during and after this war. We urge the Ministry to clarify our sovereign rights within our territory and whether and how we maintain neutrality in this war, and what stand we take.

¶ 09 Thank you.