Realist Perspectives on Eelam’s Relations with the US
Ruben Nagesparan Chandrakumar, BS
As Dr. John Mearsheimer has described, the collapse of the Soviet Union led to a unipolar moment in which the US was the sole great power in the international system. However, within the past decade, this has shifted considerably with the rise of China and Russia. In this circumstance, the Obama administration marked a substantial change in the focus of US foreign policy. Obama sought to shift the previous emphasis on Europe and the Middle East to counter China’s rise. This involved investing heavily and building alliances within East Asia under the ‘Pivot to Asia’ philosophy. Mearsheimer, an offensive realist of the structural school of thought, believes that within the inherent anarchy of the international system, states are forced to act in ways that result in security competition. “In his analysis, China poses a greater threat to US security strategy and global hegemony than Russia. Mearsheimer reasons this is because China is a peer competitor with the US, while Russia lags behind.
As China continues to grow its dominance in economic growth, population size, military capabilities, and political power, the US strategy and interests will face greater threats. The Belt and Road Initiative and China’s heavy investments in foreign countries are testaments to China’s grand strategy. In the face of this expanding dominance of China and the threats posed by it, the US will face an increasing need to invest within Asia and build reliable alliances. It is within this context that the appropriate strategy and policies of Eelam must be developed. The US will need to secure its interests, investments, and allies, creating significant opportunities for nations that are wise enough to recognize this. The US has the strongest military, the strongest economy, and the strongest alliances in the world. Additionally, the US has a vested interest in seeing the prosperity and security of its allies; thus, the benefits that will be bestowed upon Asian-allied countries will continue to increase in proportion to the level of threat China poses.
The US, at its core, is a liberal democracy; furthermore, Mearsheimer explains that, for the period of time in which it was the sole power in the unipolar moment, it pursued a policy of promoting the philosophy of liberal democracy around the world—at times, forcibly. The nation which Eelam has aspired to be, as described by the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam and the political leaders of the homeland, is also a liberal democracy that favors pluralism, human rights, free elections, an impartial judiciary, and the core values which undergird liberalism. This ideological similarity plays a role in the strategic interests of the United States, given much of the US foreign-policy establishment favoring international liberalism. This, in conjunction with the role of the security competition with China, proves to be two vital components of influencing US policymakers and politicians to form a strong alliance with Eelam. Despite the long road ahead, Eelam has the potential to become a prosperous liberal democracy that has strong defense capabilities and regional power.
There has also been a recent shift in US sentiment among politicians toward holding Sri Lanka accountable and promoting the rights of Eelam Tamils. Sri Lanka has had a long-standing diplomatic relationship with the US since its independence in 1948, enjoying many benefits over the years—including support during the Eelam War. While the US had remained relatively silent on the nonviolent movement for Eelam and the initial years of the war, there were some who advocated for a separate state. In 1981, the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed a resolution which called for “the restoration of the separate sovereign state of Tamil Eelam.” While this did not have great influence, it demonstrated the varying perceptions and policy positions that have existed for decades in the US. However, this advocacy became increasingly difficult for many in the West as the crimes of the LTTE came to light and tainted the international perception of the entity. This transition was formalized in the US prescription of the LTTE as a terrorist organization in 1997. This was worsened after the tragic terrorist attacks by Al Qaeda on 9/11, when the US began to wage a global “War on Terror.”
Despite the imperfect and delayed response, the US establishment has not been blind to the war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetuated during the conflict and the severity of the situation in which Eelam Tamils currently find themselves. In November of 2020, Obama reflected and lamented that the United Nations failed to prevent “ethnic slaughter in Sri Lanka.” In February of 2020, Trump’s Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, banned the Sri Lankan army chief Shavendra Silva from entry into the US over war crimes. Lastly, a new resolution, H. RES. 1230, was introduced in May of 2024. This resolution—introduced by Representative Wiley Nickel and supported by Representatives Susan Wild, Danny Davis, Nicole Malliotakis, Mike Carey, Donald Davis, Summer Lee, Jeffrey Jackson, Gabe Vasquez, and Hillary Scholten—calls for the recognition of the hundreds of thousands of lives lost during the conflict, recognition of the genocide against Tamils, and the ensuring of nonrecurrence through an independence referendum to express the right to self-determination.
This new environment—marked by the threats of China, shared philosophical and security concerns, mutually beneficial economic intercourse, and emerging support for Eelam’s self-determination—is the reality within which Eelam now finds itself. By engaging in a comprehensive analysis of US strategy, Chinese strategy, and the nature of Mearsheimer’s “Great Power Politics,” policymakers and theoreticians can visualize the playing field on which Eelam must act if it is to survive.