A controversial political debate resurfaces in Sri Lanka as historical accusations linking the JVP to Cold War intelligence politics collide with questions about the current government’s foreign policy toward the United States and Iran.
Cold War Accusations Against the JVP
The headline “A CIA Trap to Capture the Youth” once appeared in the Aththa newspaper, the publication associated with the Sri Lanka Communist Party. The article accused Rohana Wijeweera of forming the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna under the influence of the American intelligence agency CIA. According to the narrative promoted at the time, the JVP was allegedly created to mislead Sri Lankan youth and mobilize them against the United Front government that had come to power in 1970.
That United Front administration was widely considered to be aligned with the Soviet Union. Both the Communist Party and the Lanka Sama Samaja Party were members of the coalition government and maintained ideological and political ties with Moscow. The Sri Lanka Freedom Party leadership under Sirimavo Bandaranaike also leaned toward the Soviet bloc during that period.
Within this Cold War atmosphere, leaders of the Communist Party and the LSSP believed that Western intelligence agencies were attempting to weaken governments aligned with the Soviet Union. They argued that the JVP, despite presenting itself as a radical left movement, might have been manipulated to destabilize the United Front administration.
Their reasoning followed a strategic analogy. Just as one tree from the jungle might be used to destroy another, a revolutionary youth movement could theoretically be used to overthrow a Soviet friendly government.
Wijeweera’s Ideological Journey
Rohana Wijeweera himself had initially traveled to the Soviet Union with assistance from the Communist Party in order to pursue higher education. However, his ideological path soon diverged from Soviet communism. During his time abroad, Wijeweera became attracted to the revolutionary ideas associated with Maoist China rather than the Soviet model.
This ideological shift created tensions with the Soviet authorities and ultimately forced Wijeweera to abandon his studies and return to Sri Lanka. Once back in the country, he began advocating Chinese communist ideology and mobilizing young activists around a new revolutionary vision.
His turn toward Maoism occurred at a time when Sri Lanka’s established left parties were strongly aligned with Moscow. Wijeweera sought support from the Soviet Union to build the JVP as an alternative revolutionary force. Yet the Soviet leadership remained loyal to the Communist Party and the LSSP and refused to support his movement.
When the JVP attempted an armed uprising in 1971, the Soviet Union supported the Sri Lankan government rather than the insurgents. Soviet assistance helped the government suppress the rebellion.
During the broader geopolitical environment of the Cold War, China and the United States maintained a strategic relationship in opposition to Soviet influence. India and the Soviet Union were generally aligned in one bloc, while China’s engagement with the United States created a different geopolitical dynamic.
Because Wijeweera was associated with Chinese revolutionary ideology, and China was cooperating with the United States at that time, critics of the JVP claimed that the movement indirectly served American strategic interests. This accusation contributed to the narrative promoted by the Aththa newspaper that Wijeweera was a CIA agent.
The Indo Lanka Accord and Renewed Suspicion
The political climate in Sri Lanka changed dramatically after the ethnic conflict escalated in 1983. India’s Congress government began supporting Tamil militant groups, partly because the administration of President J.R. Jayewardene was perceived as strongly pro American.
The Soviet Union supported India’s regional strategy in South Asia, since India’s actions limited American influence in the region. Under pressure from India, the Sri Lankan government eventually signed the Indo Sri Lanka Accord in 1987.
Several factors influenced India’s push for the agreement. Among them were Jayewardene’s decisions to lease the Voice of America broadcasting facility and the Trincomalee oil tank farm to the United States. These developments raised concerns among countries aligned with the Soviet Union.
Both the Communist Party and the Lanka Sama Samaja Party supported the Indo Sri Lanka Accord because they viewed it as an agreement aligned with Soviet interests and opposed to American expansion in the region.
The JVP, however, launched a violent campaign against the Indo Sri Lanka Accord. The movement portrayed the agreement as a betrayal of national sovereignty. Opponents of the JVP once again revived the accusation that the movement was acting in line with CIA objectives by attempting to sabotage the accord.
Even the government of Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi reportedly suspected that foreign intelligence agencies might be attempting to undermine the agreement. Some analysts believed that both Prabhakaran of the LTTE and Rohana Wijeweera were being manipulated to destabilize the accord.
Whether these suspicions were accurate remains a matter of debate. The Cold War environment often produced competing narratives shaped by ideological rivalry.
Questions About the Present Government
Decades later, the political landscape in Sri Lanka has changed dramatically. The JVP now leads a government that faces complex foreign policy challenges in a shifting global order.
Recent political discussions in Colombo have focused on whether the current administration’s response to global events reflects a new alignment with the United States.
Critics point to the government’s relatively cautious reaction to American involvement in Venezuela and the recent escalation of tensions with Iran. They argue that the government appears less confrontational toward Washington than the JVP historically was.
In earlier years the party frequently organized protests against American foreign policy. When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, JVP leaders mobilized demonstrations across Sri Lanka and accused the government of failing to oppose the war.
Figures such as Vijitha Herath and Bimal Rathnayake participated in protests outside the United States Embassy, demanding the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.
Similarly, the JVP political bureau condemned the 2020 assassination of an Iranian military commander by the United States. In 2024 the party again criticized American military actions against Iran and described Donald Trump as a threat to global peace.
The party also strongly opposed Sri Lanka’s involvement in international naval operations linked to Middle Eastern conflicts. When the Sri Lankan Navy was deployed to the Red Sea under a previous administration, the JVP warned that the country could be dragged into a broader global confrontation.
Yet the situation appears different today. When the United States claimed responsibility for attacking an Iranian vessel that caught fire near Sri Lanka’s maritime boundary, the current government maintained that no such attack had taken place.
Observers have also noted that the commander of the United States Pacific Fleet visited Sri Lanka shortly before the incident and held discussions with senior defense officials.
Whether these events are connected remains uncertain. However, they have fueled speculation about the evolving relationship between the Sri Lankan government and the United States.
Iran’s Historical Support for Sri Lanka
Another dimension of the debate concerns Sri Lanka’s long standing relationship with Iran. For decades Iran has provided significant economic assistance to the island nation.
One of the most important examples is the Sapugaskanda oil refinery, Sri Lanka’s only refinery facility. Iranian cooperation played a central role in its construction.
Iran also supported the development of the Uma Oya multipurpose project, which contributes to irrigation and energy generation.
During Sri Lanka’s economic crisis, Iran demonstrated flexibility by allowing debt for oil imports to be repaid through tea exports rather than immediate dollar payments. This arrangement provided important relief at a time when Sri Lanka faced severe foreign currency shortages.
Given this history of cooperation, some political commentators argue that Sri Lanka should maintain balanced diplomatic relations with Tehran.
The broader question now facing policymakers is how the country can navigate a complex geopolitical landscape involving the United States, Iran, China, and India while safeguarding its own national interests.
SOURCE :- MAWRATA.LK
