-By Diplomatic correspondent
(Lanka-e-News -19.Nov.2024,11.40 pm) Diplomatic drama has taken center stage in Sri Lanka, where accusations and eyebrow-raising revelations swirl around Former Foreign Secretary Aruni Wijewardhana. Allegedly, Wijewardhana’s choices at the 2022 COP27 summit in Egypt resemble an over-the-top soap opera — complete with questionable guest stars, lavish travel allowances, and a plot twist involving none other than Maldivian ex-President Mohamed Nasheed.
For the uninitiated, COP27 was meant to tackle global climate issues. Instead, it seems it may have also served as a high-profile stage for a diplomatic faux pas, with Sri Lankan taxpayers footing the bill. Let’s dive into this peculiar tale where diplomatic protocol met creative license.
Aruni Wijewardhana, once Sri Lanka’s Foreign Secretary and also the niece of then-President Ranil Wickremesinghe, is accused of allegedly sneaking Nasheed into the Sri Lankan delegation with all the subtlety of a drumroll. Protocols, according to critics, were bent — or perhaps karate-chopped — to give Nasheed, a former Maldivian President and then Speaker of the Maldives Parliament, Sri Lankan representation at the summit.
Reports suggest the documentation was “creatively altered” (read: falsified) to allow Nasheed to strut around as part of Sri Lanka’s official team. Was this a case of misguided goodwill or a diplomatic faux pas that could outdo any political blooper reel?
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, then leading of the opposition MP, wasn’t about to let this one slide. He slammed the government for allegedly burning taxpayer rupees faster than an inefficient diesel engine. Dissanayake’s fiery critique highlighted the irony of discussing climate change solutions while unnecessarily flying a VIP entourage halfway across the globe.
Former Maldivian President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom chimed in, too, questioning why Nasheed represented Sri Lanka when his heart (and perhaps his passport) belonged to the Maldives. Adding fuel to the fire, ex-Attorney Generals Dr. Mohammad Munawwar and Diyana Sayeed publicly dissected the legality of this arrangement, while former Assistant Commissioner of Police Abdullah Fairoosh weighed in on what he termed “an extraordinary diplomatic error.”
Not to be outdone by the Nasheed debacle, Wijewardhana reportedly extended the summit invitation list to include Ruwan Wijewardhana. His credentials? Being a relative of the president and, apparently, someone who can hold a pen — useful for his newspaper company, though possibly less so for tackling climate policy.
Ruwan’s alleged thousand-dollar travel allowances, courtesy of Sri Lanka’s hard-pressed taxpayers, raised even more eyebrows. If his involvement in climate change discussions added anything of value, it remains elusive. One could argue his greatest contribution was becoming the latest headline in this ever-escalating scandal.
Adding a touch of melodrama, sources claim that senior civil servants from the Foreign Ministry advised against including Nasheed in the Sri Lankan delegation. Their caution, however, reportedly fell on deaf ears. In what has been described as an "animated debate," Wijewardhana supposedly clashed with then-Foreign Minister Ali Sabry, disregarding his concerns.
It’s worth noting that Sri Lanka’s Foreign Ministry is no stranger to navigating rocky diplomatic waters. However, this incident appears to have taken those waters, bottled them, and sold them as iced tea at a profit.
As the proverbial dust settles, calls for a criminal investigation have emerged. Did Wijewardhana breach diplomatic protocols? Were taxpayer funds misused? And most intriguingly, why was Nasheed, a Maldivian politician, catapulted into the limelight as a Sri Lankan delegate?
Legal experts argue that if these allegations hold water, they may constitute fraud, misuse of public funds, and violations of international diplomatic norms. But before we get carried away with visions of courtroom drama, it’s important to remember that accusations aren’t convictions — yet.
Supporters of Wijewardhana have painted a different picture. They argue that her actions were guided by a genuine intent to foster regional collaboration and enhance Sri Lanka’s presence on the global stage. One might even speculate that Nasheed’s involvement was a strategic move to bolster Sri Lanka’s credibility — though the execution appears to have gone slightly haywire.
At its core, this tale of travel expenses and diplomatic blunders boils down to accountability. Climate change summits are critical for global progress, but when they’re overshadowed by scandals, they risk losing their legitimacy. Critics argue that allowing questionable expenditures and undermining established protocols harms not only the event but also the participating nations.
This unfolding saga is rich with lessons. First, nepotism and diplomacy don’t mix well — much like oil and water. Second, when representing a nation, adhering to established protocols isn’t optional; it’s mandatory. And finally, perhaps it’s time to question whether high-level summits like COP should come with stricter oversight to prevent similar debacles.
While we await the outcome of any investigations, one thing remains clear: this scandal has served as an unwelcome distraction from the serious business of tackling climate change.
As they say in the diplomatic world, it’s not about how you start the conversation but how you finish it. Whether this particular tale ends in redemption, resignation, or riveting courtroom drama, we’ll be watching with popcorn in hand.
---------------------------
by (2024-11-19 21:03:17)
Read 21930 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news
